Author: J Roberts

Health care mandate is about personal responsibility

J Roberts

Is ObamaCare dead? The decision lies with the Supreme Court which is expected to rule sometime in June. Onething is for certain, the current model of paying for and subsidizing healthcare can not remain. Whether the law is repealed or not, the current system has to change. This, all of us can agree on.

Issac J.Bailey | The Myrtle Beach Sun

“Now, it is as plain as the spectacles on Antonin Scalia’s nose that opting out of the health-care market is about as realistic as opting out of dying.” – John Cassidy of the New Yorker.

Following the debate over the Affordable Care Act has reminded me of that old saw, everybody wants to get to heaven but nobody wants to die.

The public doesn’t want private insurance companies to be able to throw people off their rolls for the sin of getting too sick, or for denying them coverage because of a pre-existing condition, something they will no longer be able to do under the Affordable Care Act come 2014.

The public wants to keep in place the Reagan-era federal law that compels emergency rooms to treat whoever shows up, no matter if that person has not a dime to his name and won’t pay no matter how many harassing phone calls bill collectors make to their home.

But the public doesn’t want to be compelled to pay for those rights.

According to a variety of studies, from the independent Congressional scorekeeper the Congressional Budget Office to independent health care industry analysts, those with insurance are subsidizing those without to the tune of maybe $43 billion every year.

The annual premiums for those with health insurance are roughly $1,000 higher to make up for the unpaid bills of the uninsured.

According to the National Coalition on Healthcare, hospitals lose about $34 billion a year providing unpaid for care – services they are required to render because of federal law dating back to 1986. The group also said that “private insurance and some public payers pay an additional $37 billion on behalf of those with no insurance.”

What’s worse is that this is probably the least efficient, most wasteful way to operate the world’s most expensive health care system.

Justice Antonin Scalia alluded to it during this week’s debate when he said that one way to solve the problem would be to simply allow insurance companies the to right to throw sick patients off their rolls.

In fact, it is. Another way to solve the problem is to no longer guarantee access to emergency medical care, meaning that if you get into a car accident and can’t speak and your insurance card isn’t visible – or you don’t have insurance – medical officials should be able to deny you care, no matter how urgently you need it.

That’ll learn Americans who are not responsible enough to either purchase insurance without being compelled or have their insurance information tattooed to their forehead in case of an emergency. (Of course, if you suffer an ugly head trauma, that tattoo wouldn’t do any good.)

The Affordable Care Act has already done a variety of things, including slowing the rise in health care costs, convincing more medical institutions to go to a pay-for-quality rather than pay-for-quantity of care model, saving seniors tens of billions of dollars in drug costs and uncovering billions of dollars in fraud.

Because it has become a political lightning rod, all of those things and the contradictions being made by opponents are being overshadowed.

Conservatives have long claimed that they are the party of personal responsibility, yet conservatives have joined with a sizable number of liberals in opposition to the individual mandate, which will require everyone above a certain age who can afford it to buy health insurance.

The individual mandate is designed to make sure as many Americans as possible are paying into a system for which each of us is benefitting, to defray some of that $43 billion bill of annual uncompensated services, to assure that the insured no longer have to pay an extra $1,000 a year to pay for the uninsured.

If not the individual mandate, then something needs to be implemented that will accomplish the same goal – something those same conservatives seem to not want to do.

Or, we can take Justice Scalia’s advice and repeal all federal laws that compel medical officials to provide services to people who can’t pay for them, emergency or not.

The problem we’ve long had with balancing our books is that we too frequently demand things for which we don’t want to pay.

The individual mandate is unpopular largely because it threatens to shift that paradigm.

Read More

Insurance companies to blame for ‘surprise’ medical bills: state report

J Roberts

Are you paying more for healthcare even when using an in-network provider? A recent report from the Department of Financial Services in New York State found that an alarming amount of consumers are faced with a greater out-of-pocket expense as insurers and providers are shifting the cost of care to them.

Greg B. Smith / NEW YORK DAILY NEWS

Big insurance companies and some greedy doctors are to blame for the growing number of New Yorkers whacked with “surprise” medical bills, a state inquiry has found.

Department of Financial Services Superintendent Benjamin Lawsky Wednesday released the results of his probe into the unanticipated bills that are slamming consumers.

“Simply put, surprise medical bills are causing some consumers to go broke,” the report states.

The Daily News has highlighted this problem with a series of stories over the last two months. Lawsky promised to push for reforms.

“Every time I have mentioned this issue to a crowd of people, I see nodding heads,” he said. “If that’s happening, it is a huge issue.”

His agency reviewed 2,000 complaints from 2011 and surveyed the 11 big insurers and HMOs who cover 95% of the New Yorkers who have health insurance.

The review found that patients who went out of their way to make sure the non-emergency treatment they sought was covered by their plan still wound up with bills from specialists — such as assistant surgeons, anesthesiologists and radiologists — who were outside their plan.

That’s because insurers often don’t make clear who will be involved and how much it will cost, the report found.

One patient who complained to the Financial Services department made sure to go to an in-network hospital for brain surgery but wound up with a surgeon who wasn’t in his plan. The surgeon billed him $40,091 and the insurer covered only $8,386 – leaving him to cough up $31,704.

Sherry Tomasky, advocacy director of the American Cancer Society, praised the report and criticized the “undue financial burdens that are often placed on (patients) at a time when they are least able to handle it – both financially and emotionally.”

DFS quoted ridiculously complex language one insurer cited in claiming it met its disclosure requirements: “reimbursement is based on a percentile of national prevailing charge data compiled for a specific procedure and adjusted for geographic differences.”

“Unfortunately, language such as this does not provide consumers with meaningful information,” the department wrote.

The review also documented complaints that a “small but significant number” of doctors “appear to take advantage of the fact that emergency care must be delivered” by inflating bills for treatment that’s not covered.

The survey found out-of-pocket costs for out-of-network radiology or x-ray services during emergency care averaged $2,910; for anesthesiology it was $1,794.

The Health Plan Association, the lobby group representing insurers, praised the report for shining a light on excessive bills by doctors for ER care.

“These egregious practices contribute to the rising cost of health insurance for New Yorkers,” Paul F. Macielak, HPA president, said.

The report also noted that insurers have been reducing coverage for out-of-network care and making it tougher to file claims.



Read More

Aetna sues 9 N.J. doctors for “unconscionable” fees

J Roberts

Lawsuits claim that the out-of-network physicians charged as much as $50,000 for an inpatient consultation.

By Alicia Gallegos,

American Medical News

Aetna Inc. has accused nine New Jersey doctors of charging excessive fees for out-of-network services. Four are countersuing, alleging that the insurer is guilty of fraudulent billing practices.

The lawsuits are the latest development in a debate among insurers and health care professionals over “usual, customary and reasonable” rates for out-of-network doctors.

Aetna sued the physicians between July and November 2010, claiming that they had charged “unconscionable” fees for services and threatened to balance-bill patients if not paid.

Cardiologist Benjamin Hannallah, MD, of Watchung, N.J., charged up to $48,980 for an inpatient consultation in 2009, an increase of more than $47,000 from his 2007 rate, according to one of the lawsuits. The average Medicare charge for an inpatient consultation is $358.12, according to 2010 data from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services.

Cardiologist Karan Nejad, MD, of Hackensack, N.J., raised his fee for seeing critically ill hospital patients from $2,040 in 2007 to $15,000 in 2008, another lawsuit claims. The average charge for the first hour of a critical care visit is $520.76, according to CMS data.

Gynecologist-obstetrician Waleed Abdelghani, MD, of Hackensack, who assisted in two cesarean sections, allegedly charged $30,000 for each surgery, while in-network surgeons were paid about $2,000 for the same procedure, Aetna said. Standard pay for a surgeon assisting a C-section is $1,400, Aetna spokeswoman Cynthia Michener said.

“These were just outrageous bills,” she said. “We are hoping to develop some case law here that there is such a thing as an outrageous fee.”

The sued physicians treated patients at hospitals in Aetna’s network. The patients had no knowledge they were being treated by out-of-network doctors, Michener said.

Attorneys for the doctors denied Aetna’s allegations and maintained the fee rates were reasonable. Aetna has taken the charges out of context and made much of simple clerical errors, said Robert J. Conroy, attorney for Drs. Hannallah and Nejad.

“Their case is built on half-truths, innuendo and omissions of material facts,” he said.

Aetna is attempting to establish regulations on out-of-network fees through the courts because of its failure to do so legislatively, said George Frino, attorney for interventional cardiologist Deepak Srinivasan, MD, of Hackensack, one of the defendants.

“[Dr. Srinivasan] was shocked and appalled that an insurance carrier would claim fraudulent billing activities when, for years, his invoices were processed in due course, and no complaint was ever made by Aetna,” Frino said. “In our mind, this is a gross misuse and abuse of the judicial system.”

Between November 2010 and March, four physicians, including Dr. Srinivasan, countersued Aetna. They allege deceptive billing practices and racketeering, among other claims. Aetna denies the allegations and has asked a judge to dismiss the suits.

Most out-of-network physicians practice fair billing, Michener said. Only a handful take financial advantage of hospital patients, she said.

Aetna plans to review similar billing patterns in other states to identify doctors who are potentially billing excessively.

“Some doctors who used to be in-network realized they could go out-of-network and raise fees because they had a captive patient base in the hospital,” she said.

Billing system at odds

Insurers and physicians have fought in court elsewhere over acceptable UCR rates.

In 2000, the Litigation Center of the American Medical Association and State Medical Societies sued Aetna, UnitedHealth Group and several others over a database used to determine fees for out-of-network care. The Litigation Center said the system for years had been using flawed data to set the rates.

The suits triggered an investigation by Andrew Cuomo, then New York attorney general. In 2009, UnitedHealth Group reached a $350 million settlement.

As part of a separate settlement with Cuomo’s office, large health insurers operating in New York agreed to stop using the data. None of the companies that settled admitted wrongdoing. Cases against Aetna, Cigna and WellPoint are pending.

Ingenix, a subsidiary of UnitedHealth Group, which sold the database at the center of the Cuomo agreements, is now known as OptumInsight.

A database created by FAIR Health, an independent nonprofit, was launched in January. Database officials expect to send payments based on the new figures to physicians by the summer.

American Medical Association President Cecil B. Wilson, MD, said the AMA supports more transparency in the out-of-network billing system.

“The AMA does not condone excessive fees for medical care and encourages physicians and patients to discuss costs before medical services are provided,” he said.

Also named in Aetna’s lawsuits are: internist Magdy Wahba, MD, of Paterson, N.J.; neurological surgeons, David Estin, MD, Jonathan Lustgarten, MD, and Ty James Olson, MD, all of Ridgewood, N.J.; and obstetrician-gynecologist Azer Alizade, MD, of Hackensack, N.J. Aetna also listed several “John Does” in the suits to allow for more defendants if their involvement later becomes clear.

Read More

NJ lawmakers seeking to control insurance costs

J Roberts

Looking for greater transparency on how insurers calculate and charge for premiums? The state of NJ is intending to provide just that. A recent measure adopted by the state legislature would require all insurers to gain approval by the state’s regulatory agency before they can raise premiums.

THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

TRENTON  — Health insurance carriers who serve individuals and small businesses in New Jersey may soon have to gain state approval before implementing rate increases.

These firms currently can set and increase rates just by filing the information with the state. But a measure planned by three state lawmakers would require that the firms gain approval for such actions from the state Department of Banking and Insurance.

It also would expand the jurisdiction of the state’s Division of Rate Counsel, which now has no say over health insurance rates, to create a watchdog for residents and small businesses.

“Residents deserve a watchdog, someone with the knowledge to advocate on their behalf when it comes to the complicated issue of rising health care premiums,” said Assemblyman Dan Benson, D-Hamilton Township (Mercer County), who said he will sponsor the measure with fellow Democrat Valerie Vainieri Huttle of Englewood.

Democratic Senate Majority Leader Barbara Buono plans to sponsor identical legislation, with both measures likely to be introduced by year’s end.

“This legislation will provide far greater transparency,” Benson said.

Ed Rogan, spokesman for the banking and insurance department, declined to comment on the proposal. As a matter of policy, the department does not discuss proposed or pending legislation.

Besides requiring the banking and insurance department commissioner to approve any rate increase, the proposed bill also would give the commissioner authority to reject proposed rate changes deemed discriminatory or excessive.

The commissioner and rate counsel would also have to jointly hold public hearings on any proposed premium increases for insurance contracts or policies in the Individual Health Coverage Program or New Jersey Small Employers Health Benefits Program market.

Information about premium increases, including an explanation of how carriers report and calculate health insurance premiums, also would have to be posted on the department’s website.

Currently, insurers in these plans are required to spend no more than 20 percent of the premiums paid on administrative expenses.

Read More

How the seemingly largest hospital bill came to be

J Roberts

Read about the world’s largest healthcare bill.

By Karen M. Cheung

It may be the largest hospital bill ever. Estimated at $9.2 million, including interest, the bill is from Tampa (Fla.) General Hospital for the care of deceased Tameka Jaqway Campwell.

Although the American Hospital Association, the Health Care Financial Management Association, and even the Guinness Book of Records couldn’t confirm the highest hospital bill in history, according to Associated Press (AP), the $9.2 million in charges for one patient certainly draws questions into high healthcare costs and end-of-life decision making.

Campwell had an incurable disease, progressive demyelinating neuropathy. The patient’s mother Holly Bennett accused the hospital of not feeding her daughter and giving her too much morphine, which, she claimed, resulted in the patient’s weight falling to 37 pounds, reports the AP. Campwell died two years ago.

The hospital is suing the patient’s estate for the outstanding bill.

“If they think they’re getting money from me, they’re crazy,” Bennett said in the article. “Who’s ever even heard of a bill that high?”

Although the hospital charges will likely drop to $2.25 million after readjustments, Bennett told ABC News she would not pay the multimillion-dollar bill. She said that she never received an itemized bill during the five years of treatment and that the lawsuit is a strategy to prevent her from filing her own lawsuit for medical malpractice against the hospital.

A frequent complaint from patients and providers alike, patients often do not understand the associated costs for tests and care with no clear prices for services.

“This is tragic,” said Alan Sager, a professor of health policy and management at Boston University School of Public Health, in the ABC article. “A patient apparently received costly care that might have made her more comfortable–and might have slowed the progression of her illness, but these interventions apparently could do little more than slow a steep decline.”

Hospital palliative care has doubled in the past decade, ranking as one of the fastest growing specialties with 63 percent of U.S. hospitals using palliative programs. According to a Center to Advance Palliative Care report this month, there are 1,568 palliative teams at nationwide hospitals, up from just 658 in 2000.

Read More

Cut Costs by Reducing Redundant or Inefficient Activity

J Roberts

What’s the parallel between the world’s largest car manufacturer -Toyota – and the American Healthcare System?  Read on to learn how total quality management and improved operational efficiencies can reduce waste and decrease spending in our healthcare system.

By Mark Graban and Rob Harding August 09, 2011

Enlist your employees to help find and eliminate waste in your organization’s processes.

Many hospital CEOs, including John Toussaint, M.D., the former CEO of ThedaCare, and thought leaders, including Donald Berwick, M.D., M.P.P., administrator for the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, estimate that 30 to 50 percent of all health care spending can be described as waste — activity that provides no benefit to patients. This adds up to more than $1 trillion a year in the United States. Instead of merely slashing reimbursements or providing less care, there is a clear opportunity to do more — and provide the right care — with less waste and less spending.

The word “waste,” or muda in Japanese, is one of the most commonly used terms in Lean management, which is based on the Toyota Production System. According to Toyota, there are eight types of waste, each of which can be translated directly into health care:

Lean’s Eight Types of Waste

Examples of Waste Found in Hospitals

Defects

Lost or mislabeled laboratory specimens

 

Overproduction

Medications sent to inpatient units in 24-hour batches, leading to wasted medications if orders

Change

Transportation

Moving patients a long distance from the operating room to recovery

Waiting

Patients waiting weeks for an appointment, or waiting hours to be seen in the emergency department, resulting in exacerbated conditions

Inventory

Expired supplies due to overstocking and poor rotation of inventory

Motion

Staff walking in excess because high-use surgical instruments and packs are not grouped together in perioperative services

Processing

Staff writing or entering the same patient information into multiple forms or software screens

Human potential

Nurses dragging bags of dirty linen down the hallway; staff members unengaged in improvement activities

In health care, Lean teaches us to engage all staff members in a never-ending search for waste, making quality and process improvements that benefit patients, leading to lower costs. Reducing waste is very different, in mindset and practice, from traditional cost cutting, as Lean waste reduction looks at how the actual work is performed rather than focusing on spreadsheets, budgets and financial benchmarks. Reducing errors, improving throughput, reducing staff frustration — all of these tactics reduce costs.

A Lean Perspective on Waste

Traditional organizations might see that 60 percent or 70 percent of their expense is direct labor cost. This realization often leads to the idea that the clearest path to cost reduction is to eliminate people (again, often based on benchmarks). Lean methodology takes a different view: Waste reduction cannot be used to drive layoffs, as that would put an end to staff engagement in the improvement process — a core Lean principle.

Leading health care organizations that actively employ Lean tactics, including ThedaCare, Denver Health and Avera McKennan, all have “no layoffs due to Lean” commitments with employees. Engaging people to reduce waste through process improvement has led to significant savings at these organizations — more than $54 million at Denver Health, for example — along with quality and access improvement, thanks to a culture of collaboration. (more…)

Read More

Insurance mandates again hike costs

J Roberts

Recent government mandates in the state of Connecticut raise the cost of insurance for all. While the act aims to offer more comprehensive services, it may, in actuality prove as a disservice by raising the overall cost of insurance to the states residents.  Read on to learn more.

By Greg Bordonaro

While tax increases, paid sick leave and union concessions took up most of the attention during the recent legislative session, lawmakers passed a flurry of new health insurance mandates that will raise the cost health insurance for employers.

In all, seven new mandates — some of which business lobbyists have fought for years — passed the legislature and have been signed into law by Gov. Dannel P. Malloy.

A health insurance “mandate” is something for which an insurance company or health plan must offer coverage, and whose costs typically get passed onto employers.

Health mandates have been a hot political issue in Connecticut for years. The business community has long voiced opposition, citing costs. But supporters say cost concerns are overblown and that the benefits outweigh the price.

The divide illustrates a central issue in the broader health care debate. The question of how to control health care costs, while also mandating adequate coverage that prevents and treats illnesses effectively, has been difficult to answer.

New mandates passed this year:

• Expand coverage requirements for certain patient clinical trials, breast MRIs, colonoscopies and prostate cancer screenings;

• Increase the maximum annual coverage for ostomy-related supplies from $1,000 to $2,500;

• Require coverage for bone marrow testing;

• And place new restrictions on insurance companies that require the initial use of over-the-counter drugs for pain treatment.

“It is a fundamental truth that as you add benefits you increase costs,” said Keith Stover, a lobbyist for the state’s health insurance industry. “The math isn’t that complicated.”

According to a report by the Council for Affordable Health Insurance (CAHI), which is funded by the insurance industry, Connecticut had 59 mandates at the end of 2010, making it the fifth most demanding state.

While mandates make health insurance more comprehensive, they also make it more expensive, requiring insurers to pay for care patients previously funded out of their own pocket. Those expenses often get passed onto employers through higher premiums.

(more…)

Read More

Employee wellness programs help companies deal with rising healthcare costs

J Roberts

One way corporate America is tackling the rise in healthcare costs is by offering an employee wellness program.  Many are offering incentives to employees in terms of gifts and rewards for employees who become actively engaged. The benefits are worth the investment as employers are encouraging employees to take an active role in maintaining their health.

KePRO Industry News

Many employers’ healthcare costs are soaring as a result of the high prevalence of chronic diseases. This is cutting into profit margins and making it difficult for companies to expand. In order to address the situation, many businesses are looking to employee wellness programs.

For example, a group of business leaders in Oregon and state health officials recently joined forces to form the initiative Wellness@Work, according to Oregon Business. The project provides companies with an online resource that they can use gauge their employees’ levels of wellness and consider new initiatives to improve well-being.

“We’re hoping businesses will bring together a committee of employees from all departments to make changes to their workplaces,” Dawn Robbins, the state’s worksite wellness coordinator, told the news source.

She added that despite fears over the cost of the initiatives, most businesses see a significant return on their investment in employee wellness. In fact, the Wellness Council of America estimates that most will experience a return of $3 for every $1 invested.

This could help businesses handle the dramatic rise in healthcare costs that are expected to occur this year and beyond.

Read More

Be Prepared!

J Roberts

Be Prepared…Your House or Your Health? Today health care is everywhere — in the CEOs office and around the kitchen table. Five years ago it was in neither place. Does this mean that consumers are prepared for the tsunami of health care change coming? This article by our friends at Allexian Consulting describes some very real issues and some innovative models emerging to help consumers.

James D. Calver

Allexian LLC

Be Prepared!

The average consumer, Joe or Jane, age 25 or older, makes $32,000 per year, does not have a college degree, drives a car, lives in his or her own home, and holds a white-collar office job. They can tell you their grocery bill, the price and quality of food, their car price and monthly payment, their mortgage payment and house value. Ask Joe or Jane how much their health care costs —  the cost of treatments, the cost and quality of their plan, are they getting a fair price and you’ll get a blank stare.

In 2014 Joe and Jane are going to be hit by a health care tsunami. The average mortgage payment today is $700/month with $1000 of annual home maintenance on top of that. The price of health care for many families will exceed the cost of owning a home and become the biggest single expense a family has each year.

Consumers are unprepared.

For 50 years consumers have outsourced their health care. Employers chose employee health care plans and (mostly) paid for them. Physicians treated disease conditions paternalistically. Payers administered plans and guided consumer choice of their physicians.

Consumers need to in-source their care and take control.

The numbers are big. Between now and 2014, 30 million new consumers will be coming to terms with new health care programs. Surveys show that many employers will scrap their own health care plans and “dump” their employees into exchanges. The total number of consumers dealing with health care change will be far bigger than the 30 million from last year’s reform. We estimate that this will be north of 40 million consumers.

What does in-sourcing health care mean? It means taking control of all the key decisions of your own heal care. Choosing a plan, checking prices of treatments, being sure you’re getting a fair price, etc. Consumers need tools and information to manage their health care decisions.

What tools? What information? To answer these questions it is useful to compare other more familiar buying decisions — groceries and homes. When we buy groceries, we want to know the price in advance of getting to check out. We want to know the quality too. When we buy a house, we want to know the quality and price of the house, the cost of the mortgage, how much the utilities and taxes are and the general condition of the neighborhood. We also want to know how much ‘house’ we can afford and if we are getting a fair price. We get help from brokers in negotiating a fair price and get comparable house prices from Zillow and other rersources.

Buying health care isn’t exactly like buying groceries, nor is it exactly like buying a house. But it is has much in common with the two together. When you buy a health care plan, you want to know the cost and quality of the plan. You have to find a physician, you’d like to know the quality of the physician, patient experiences and quality of care. Some patients like to research their disease conditions. You want to know how much treatment is going to cost and if you’re getting a fair price (before you get to check out). You may want help negotiating a price for a big clinical treatment or procedure.

Some of these tools and information are available already. New growth business models are emerging.

Buying a Health Plan — Exchanges

Individual states will either run the exchanges themselves or outsource to a third party. Exchange businesses can charge a modest fee for operating the service that matches a consumer with a health care plan.  eHealthInsurance is a broker of health care plans. They advertise low plan rates and based on input from the consumer recommend a plan and estimate of monthly payment. From personal experience, this payment and what the health insurers eventually charge can be much higher — this is explained in the small print.

While coverage cannot be denied for pre-existing conditions, the insurers have latitude to charge more in monthly premiums for these conditions. The unwary consumer is in for some nasty surprises.

We recommend that exchanges use crowd-sourcing technology, in the style of Angie’s List, Amazon and eBay to provide reviews and feedback on plans. This information will help consumers make better and more informed decisions.

Researching a Disease

The availability of clinical information has undergone a tectonic shift. For the first time since the medicine men of old began treating ailments, all medical knowledge is available today via the web to a consumer. That shift contributes to the drive away from paternalistic clinical practice. Enlightened consumers of care use WebMD, Mayo, Cleveland Clinic and many others to research diseases and treatments.

Today 30% of consumers visit a medical web site before visiting a physician. That number is trending upwards annually. We think that creating a consumer pay model here will be difficult. For over a decade consumers have not paid directly for access to this information and we don’t think that will change.

Researching Physician Quality of Care and Patient Experience

The best physician web information services focus on aggregating publicly available information on a physician — where they went to school, published papers, malpractice law suits, etc. Some companies, like Angie’s List, have attempted to capture patient experience. At their best these sites provide information of marginal value. Comments on care are unstructured and not attributed to a particular treatment or regimen.

Outcomes information as a measure of quality of care and meaningful patient experience remain elusive for the consumer today. We believe that there is promise in Vestar’s acquisition of Colorado based HealthGrades, the health care ratings company. Vestar also owns Press-Ganey, the hospital patient rating group. Also, new companies like DocInsight that deliver information on the patient experience show promise.

Estimating Treatment Costs?

Shopping for routine health care should be like buying groceries. NexTag, the web aggregator of prices for many technology and popular consumer items has been successful over the last decade. Castlight.com is a growing service provider that can help consumers understand the status of their health plan, i.e. how much they have to spend before meeting their deductible and provides local pricing information across providers for many routine treatments.

This step toward price transparency has far reaching ramifications and inserts supply and demand pricing pressure into local markets. Physicans pay for referrals and pay to be listed.

Naysayers will rant that it’ll never work and physicians will never sign up. Those same naysayers said the same thing about airlines and hotel groups 10 years ago. Today Travelocity, Orbitz and Expedia have a valuation in excess of the major airlines and hotel groups combined!

Getting a Fair Price

This is another area of great promise. MedicalCostAdvocate.com helps consumers negotiate better prices for treatments with payers and takes a percentage of the savings. Society wins with lower cost care which in turn will force efficiencies in providers. Patients win with lower health care expenses.

Summary

Health care is about to undergo turmoil and change like never seen before. Surfers wait for “The Wave” and the Wave is coming.  Businesses need to incubate new growth and revenue models that help the consumer be prepared.

Read More

Out-of-Network Rates

J Roberts

By ANNA WILDE MATHEWS

Wall Street Journal

Patients beware: Your out-of-pocket expense for healthcare may increase. Learn about what many large insurers are doing when it comes to paying for doctors and hospitals that are not in a plans network. It could prove to be very costly to the average consumer. All the more need to obtain and advocate who can help negotiate your medical bills

Consumers know they will have to pay out of their pockets if they use medical providers outside their insurers’ networks. But because of a little-noticed change, they may find themselves with even bigger bills than they expect.

Several major insurers are now using rates based on Medicare fees to calculate payments for out-of-network providers. Those amounts are often a lot lower than what doctors and hospitals actually charge.

The upshot: Providers may bill patients for the difference. What’s more, that bill comes on top of whatever patients owe in deductibles or co-payments.

New York entertainment attorney Mark D. Sendroff says he knew he’d get a bill when he went to an out-of-network surgeon for a shoulder operation last summer. But he was shocked when his AetnaHealthinsurance plan paid only around $1,000 of the surgeon’s approximately $30,000 charge — and part of the payment was his deductible. “It was absolutely crazy,” he says.

Mr. Sendroff thought the plan was going to pay his doctor based on a “usual and customary” rate that’s supposed to represent a typical charge for his area. Instead, the insurer pegged the doctor’s reimbursement to 110% of the fee paid by Medicare. Mr. Sendroff appealed the decision, and after he contacted the New York attorney general’s office, Aetna agreed to pay more, he says.

Aetna says some of its plans began basing out-of-network payments on Medicare rates in late 2009, and typically they pay a percentage above the government program’s fees. In New York, the company says it warned insurance brokers the new system might generate bigger out-of-pockets, and mentioned the issue in a summary for potential customers. Aetna declined to comment on Mr. Sendroff’s case, citing privacy rules, but said $30,000 was “well above the average charge” for such surgeries.

Health Care Service, the nonprofit parent of Blue Cross and Blue Shield plans in Illinois and Texas among other states, began phasing in Medicare-based fees last year. Cigna says employers are increasingly opting for plans that pay a set percentage above Medicare.

Insurers say Medicare is a reasonable basis for reimbursement. An Aetna spokeswoman says the Medicare based payments are a “more consistent way of paying and keeping the premium down.” Health Care Service says the Medicare method helps “increase transparency for providers and members.”

For patients, the safest financial path is to use insurers’ networks. When this isn’t possible, they need to do their homework before getting treatment by talking to their providers and insurers. It’s best to get billing codes for each service and run them past the health plan, says Ida Schnipper of Health Champion, a patient-advocacy firm.

Patients also should watch for unexpected out-of-network providers. For instance, an in-network hospital might have out-of-network anesthesiologists. If they do get stuck with a charge they didn’t see coming, they can appeal to the insurer and also try turning to a state regulator for help. Providers also sometimes negotiate discounts with patients.

Starting in August, consumers can turn to a new usual-and-customary medical charge database operated by Fair Health, which will be available at fairhealthconsumer.org. Currently, the site only has dental fees. The nonprofit says it expects a growing number of insurers to use its data.

Read More