Private Insurance: Still Inefficient
Interesting article in today's Times substantiating all the bellyaching over medical paperwork. Insurers, it turns out, don't like to pay claims. Better yet, sometimes they don't. The reasons range from denials of responsibility to calculated tardiness to lame protestations that they lost, or didn't receive, the papers, which were sent by certified mail. Estimates have the cost of following up on these arguments comprising about 20% of administrative costs at doctor's offices. Guess who ends up paying the difference?
Athenahealth decided to rank the various insurers. Humana, surprisingly, comes out on top, followed closely by Medicare. WellPoint ranked last. The insurers, for their point, argue that 40% of denials happen because of mistakes on the doctor's part -- an incorrect address, or a miscopied insurance card. But this stuff does matter. Take Pediatric Alliance, a consortium of 37 pediatricians around Pittsburgh. They spend "at least $250,000 a year on salaries for eight billing clerks who handle claims and pursue money owed by insurers and patients. That is on top of salaries in Pediatric Alliance's offices for staff members to verify the patient's coverage and collect co-payments, plus paying an outside company to check for errors before the bills go out." Yowch.
Most interesting is the graphic on the article's first page. I'm occasionally told that Medicare's dirt-cheap administration doesn't mean anything: they just approve all claims instantly. That's -- what's the word? -- crap. Medicare pays 92% of claims in full upon first submission. UnitedHealth pays 89.1%, Humana 87.7%, Aeta 86.7%, etc. They deny 8.9% of charges, more than Humana, Tricare, or Cigna. Add in that Medicare's spending growth is actually slower than the private sector's, and that's another attack on government-run insurance that withers under scrutiny.














Ezra,
I'm not sure if your analysis is just lazy or intellectually dishonest.
1. Its extremely misleading to compare claims rates percentages or spending growth when we are talking about two completely different patient populations . At minimum, find a comparable subset of private insurance patients (i.e. those aged 60-65) and compare them to Medicare patients (i.e. aged 65-70), and then come back with some actually legitimate data.
2. You've fundamentally misunderstood the statement that Medicare "approves all claims instantly." This isn't about the claims denial rate (by the way, why is "upon first submission" the correct metric for this even if this was the right question?) but about the fact that Medicare does very little in actually managing care up to the point of a claim being submitted- i.e. formularies, prior authorization, step therapy, pre-certification, referral requirements, etc. Those processes do have associated administrative costs that Medicare doesn't currently bear- and do have impact on constraining health care costs.
May 26, 2006 1:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
I don't know much about Medicare claims processing, but I have had a fair amount of experience through work with other public programs (Medicaid and CHIP programs) and I can testify to the fact that these programs have some incredibly complex ways of winnowing their costs down to very minimal levels-- far more complex in fact that what private insurers generally do. It's not so common for them to outright deny claims (assuming the claims aren't completely out of bounds) but they can and do cut payouts by very large dollar amounts and the providera, having agreed to accept whatever is paid, cannot seek additional payment from the patient beyond the specified copays.
May 26, 2006 5:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
JPF,
Medicaid has negotiated very low rates, but I have a small but important quibble with your post. As far I am aware, Medicaid has one tool in its chest that is unique to them: "Take it or leave it." Given the overwhelming number of providers that refuse to accept Medicaid patients, that doesn't seem to be too impressive. Otherwise, I haven't seen innovative techniques to manage costs that were created by Medicaid/CHIP programs.
If you disagree and still state there are "incredibly complex" methods created by these public programs, please enlighten me- I'd like to hear about them because I don't think they exist.
May 26, 2006 6:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
Re: If you disagree and still state there are "incredibly complex" methods created by these public programs, please enlighten me- I'd like to hear about them because I don't think they exist.
I worked, in IT, for a company that administered a mix of both public and private plans. When our company was applying for business from several state Medicaid programs (Florida, South Carolina, Ohio) we had to imnplement major and complex changes to our software system in order accommodate the claims processing these programs required-- things that the private groups we contracted with were not doing. The fee schedules alone were an absolute nightmare to integerate into our system.
May 27, 2006 1:24 PM | Reply | Permalink