Insight, analysis & opinion from Joe Paduda

Mar
22

(one of) Consumer directed health’s fatal flaws

I don’t see how consumer directed health care as presently conceived is going to work (“work” defined as significantly reduce health care cost inflation). Among other problems with the concept, most of the dollars are spent by folks with chronic or very expensive acute conditions that have costs far above their deductibles eliminating any incentive for these folks to worry about costs.
But I’ll suspend logic for the moment to consider another issue. If consumer-directed health care is going to work, consumers will have to know what their health status is, what their health status means in terms of potential morbidity, and what health care (for those conditions) might cost them. Then, if they want to be “educated consumers,” they will need to have current, accurate information on the costs and outcomes of health care providers in their geographic area who treat their specific conditions (or potential conditions).
The first two aren’t too tough, at least on a population basis. Health risk appraisals have done a pretty good job of forecasting future health conditions…for the general population. And epidemiology has evolved into a reasonably accurate science for prediction of population-based morbidity and associated trends.
The last two are also not too tough, again on a population basis (seeing a trend here?). Case-mix adjusting physician outcomes can produce a fairly accurate picture of individual physician and/or facility outcomes. If you have a large enough sample size and if the diagnoses and other data are accurate, consistent, and complete. Rather big ifs…
(I apologize in advance for denigrating the rather significant issues inherent in case-mix assessment and analysis and ignoring the wide variation in practice patterns across specialties, geography, and physician. I’m making a huge generalization to make another point.)
The big breakdown is our individual uniqueness – we are each a population of one. And that’s where “consumerism” blows apart.
We each get treated as individuals, not as populations. We have unique combinations of co-morbidities, allergies, pre-existing conditions, quirks, differences, nuance, needs and fears. Some of us know a lot about medical stuff, and most of us don’t know much at all. And some patients think that “quality care” is getting in to see the doc within a couple of days, while others view it as a clean waiting room with lots of interesting magazines, and still others want a doc who is warm and smiles, while another group wants to see case-mix adjusted statistics on outcomes.
This “a plus b plus c plus d…” is what makes each patient unique, a population of one.
And docs have to treat individuals, not populations. So, each patient gets treated a little differently.
Patients need to take responsibility for their health, and play an active role in their care. No debate there. But in an increasingly specialized world, with physicians unable to keep up with the growing library of medical knowledge, individual expertise getting deeper and narrower and an educational system which is hard-pressed to adequately educate many Americans on some rather basic subjects, it is not only irresponsible but incredibly naïve to expect or demand individuals have all the knowledge and experience required to effectively “manage” their own health care.
The bright-eyed, textbook-quoting academics and theoreticians citing both obscure economic theory and Adam Smith see consumerism as the cure for health care’s ills. Boy are they clueless.
Oscar Wilde’s oft-quoted ” …a cynic is one who knows the price of everything and the value of nothing” also applies to these “health care economists.”


Mar
22

Hilarity break II

And you thought Part D was all serious stuff…
Thanks to Helen of kingknight.com for the tip!


Mar
21

Site Snafus

I’m in the process of “upgrading” the software app that drives this site, and in the process seem to have downgraded some user experiences. A few readers have experienced problems doing searches, others (including me) have been fascinated by the wierd hieroglyphs appearing in some posts (no I have not begun a sanskrit version) and others can’t find anything.
I’m working on it, and apologize for the problems.
I wish I could blame it on Bill Gates…


Mar
21

St. Paul Travelers won’t be merging with Zurich

The rumors of a potential St. Paul/Travelers merger with Zurich are likely groundless. Sources indicate that reports of a pending deal in the Wall Street Journal between the two insurers are incorrect.
According to a high-level exec at one of the companies, “there are no discussions at any level for either a merger with ZFS or an acquisition of the North American P&C operation.”
That said, St. Paul/Travelers is in the acquisition mode, and will likely buy something this year.


Mar
21

What the uninsured mean to you

If businesses and politicians think the 45 million uninsured are not their problem, they are wrong. Really wrong. The uninsured get health care, they just don’t pay for it – taxpayers, employers, and those of us with health insurance do. And they get a lot of care – around $100 billion worth.
Out of that $100 billion, three-quarters is covered by cost-shifting to those patients with insurance, and one-quarter is self-paid. And because upwards of 30% of the uninsured who are admitted to hospitals are there for avoidable conditions and 18,000 die prematurely each year, the economic costs in terms of excess care and forgone productivity are immense.
There are overt taxes and hidden taxes – and the uninsured represent a $100 billion hidden tax, borne by employers who offer health insurance, employees who pay part of their premiums, and taxpayers.
The next time someone says we can’t afford to cover the uninsured, tell them we already are, and we are paying way more than we would if they had insurance.
What does this mean for you?
Higher taxes and premiums due to lack of political will.


Mar
20

How companies reduce health care inflation

Yes, there are ways for employers to keep health care inflation under control. And yes, some insurers are better positioned to help manage expense over the long term. Some employers have been able to hold health care cost increases under 3% for two years or more. That is an amazing result, especially in a period where many employers have seen double-digit premium jumps. How do they do it? Do they fire sick employees? Only hire Olympic athletes? Are they the early adopters of consumer-directed health plans (CDHPs)?
No no and no. Rather, these employers are not the ones relying largely on CDHPs, engaging in significant cost-shifting to employees, slashing benefits or limiting eligibility. According to one of the sponsors of a study on high-performing employee health plans:
“merely increasing employee accountability or sharing costs with employees does not reduce overall cost increases. In fact, the degree to which organizations have adopted programs that share more costs and financial risks with employees was found to be almost completely unrelated to performance.
“Employers should not focus on employee accountability alone,” said (Helen) Darling. “When used in combination with promoting quality care, health management, use of data and appropriate use of care, companies are able to achieve significantly lower cost trends.”
Of all the health plans, managed care firms, and insurers out there, Aetna looks to be the best positioned to provide employers with the tools they need to identify the right docs, pay them fairly (although this is, at best, a work in progress), and educate consumers about appropriate health benefit, and health care, decisions.

Continue reading How companies reduce health care inflation


Mar
17

Cavanaugh leaving LWCC

The Louisiana Workers Compensation Corp has a new leader; long-time CEO Steve Cavanaugh has left to take a position with a new workers comp start up in Dallas. Cavanaugh’s replacement will be LWCC’s current COO, Kristen Wall.
This is more than the usual transition – Cavanaugh headed up LWCC and was indirectly responsible for the innovative work the company did in provider network management, an approach that has proven to deliver results significantly better than industry standards.
LWCC’s results were driven in large part by their use of a relatively small network of occupational medicine physicians, chosen for their expertise in disability management and demonstrated outcomes. While some of the physicians provided care at a discount, all received a payment of around $250 to manage each case.
Cavanaugh did not provide any details on his new venture; the fact that his new firm hired someone with his track record bodes well for their results.


Mar
16

More problems for Marsh

Marsh Mclennan, the nation’s largest broker, has once again been hit by a civil suit charging bid rigging, hidden commissions, and RICO violations. This time the suit has been filed in Florida’s Lee County.
According to the St. Petersburg Times, one of the issues deals with hidden commission payments from insurers:
“The suit does allege Marsh contracted with Miami-Dade County to provide coverage for services for a flat fee, but received from insurers an additional $140,000 in hidden commissions.”
Marsh has condemned the suit, noting it simply repeats the charges filed by (and not coincidentally settled for $850 million by) NY Attorney General Eliot Spitzer.
Thanks to Helen Knight for the tip.


Mar
16

Noe’s non-WC problems

This is at best tangential to managed care, but I just can’t stop watching the Tom Noe train wreck.
Noe’s trial date for allegedly laundering money to fund the Bush campaign will be set shortly, and it may well fall during the campaigning season, bringing tears to the eyes of his former colleagues in the Ohio GOP. Noe, a source of much fodder for this and other blogs due to his criminal mismanagement of Ohio’s workers compensation funds, is now a pariah in his own party.

Continue reading Noe’s non-WC problems


Mar
15

Questions about United Health

Industry giant (and ex-employer) UnitedHealthGroup is taking fire from an analyst who questions the company’s ability to hold down health care costs, reserving practices, and the results of UHG’s Pacificare division. The analyst, Matthew Borsch of Goldman Sachs, is perhaps the only one on the street recommending against UHG – that said, his points are worth considering and may portend troubles for the industry as a whole.
Borsch notes:
– the Arizona Dept of Insurance recently levied its largest-ever fine ($340,000) against UHG for allegedly not responding to consumer complaints; failing to follow grievance and appeals processes; and not handling disputed payments appropriately. While those problems are not atypical of the industry, UHG was hit hard because it had been cited for similar issues earlier and failed to correct the problems.
– UHG faces another possible hit from a pending class-action suit similar to one that has been settled by Aetna and Cigna, who each paid $160 million to settle their cases. The case is in court this week.
– more troubling is UHG’s apparent problems with health care costs, which have been accelerating of late. That rise, coupled with the company’s payment of medical claims appears to have slowed recently, adds to concerns about future profitability.
While analysts’ opinions should always be viewed with caution, Borsch’s prognostications about UHG have been quite accurate in the past; his forecasts for UHG were the most accurate in the industry in 2004. And, his experience working at industry giant HealthNet probably gives him a leg up on the other erstwhile “experts”.
What does this mean to you?
If UHG stumbles due to higher medical costs, that will be a strong signal that health cost inflation remains unmanageable – and that will be very bad news indeed.
Thanks to Matt Holt’s FierceHealthcare for the lead.


Joe Paduda is the principal of Health Strategy Associates

SUBSCRIBE BY EMAIL

SEARCH THIS SITE

A national consulting firm specializing in managed care for workers’ compensation, group health and auto, and health care cost containment. We serve insurers, employers and health care providers.

 

DISCLAIMER

© Joe Paduda 2024. We encourage links to any material on this page. Fair use excerpts of material written by Joe Paduda may be used with attribution to Joe Paduda, Managed Care Matters.

Note: Some material on this page may be excerpted from other sources. In such cases, copyright is retained by the respective authors of those sources.

ARCHIVES

Archives