May
6

Stratacare deal closed

Bill review vendor Stratacare announced the closing of their financing deal this morning. An investment group led by long-term industry veteran Paul Glover now owns a majority stake in the company; SV Life Sciences and Beecken Petty O’Keefe are the private equity firms behind the deal.
Sources indicate the deal is for a majority stake, but significant equity has been retained by the original owners.
Stratacare’s bill review customers tend to be mid-tier and smaller payers; the company’s application has strong auto-adjudication capabilities and was one of the first to integrate the ODG treatment guidelines, essential to processing medical bills in Texas. Most clients utilize their hosted services, although a few have loaded the Stratacare application on their own hardware.
Bill review companies have long been at the mercy of big network vendors who could, and have, altered the terms of their network rental arrangements at will. Stratacare and giant Coventry battled over price increases last year with Stratacare eventually paying significantly higher access fees.
Stratacare will be the foundation of a significantly expanded work comp managed care firm. Expect Stratacare, under new chairman Glover, to rapidly expand into the network business; network rental fees are often a major contributor to bill review company profits and represent a significant growth opportunity for the company. Sources indicate Stratacare is evaluating several initial market opportunities with initial focus likely on Texas, where the larger networks are having challenges meeting payers’ needs.
More details to follow: I have a query into Stratacare.
For now, off to the NCCI annual conference…


May
6

Hospitals are in dire shape. 31% of US health care costs are from hospitals, and by almost any measure, they are hurting badly.
Revenues are declining, profitable services are way down, layoffs are announced weekly (layoffs, in healthcare!!), more and more patients are uninsured, and donations have declined dramatically. Those hospital systems that are reporting decent results seem to be doing so through one-time asset sales and other non-operating measures.
As to what’s driving the crisis; if you’ll forgive the creative math, here’s how the calculus works:
Rising unemployment -> more uninsured -> fewer profitable admissions + more charitable (i.e. non compensated) care + more Medicaid (i.e. money-losing) care = big financial trouble for hospitals
Almost all hospitals make their margins on private pay patients. According to Tenet Health’s CEO, (paraphrasing) ‘Tenet’s profits come from the 27% of patients who have commercial managed-care coverage; it breaks even on Medicare patients, and loses money, to varying degrees, on patients with Medicaid coverage, self-paying uninsured and those who qualify as charity cases’.
The latest bad news comes from Massachusetts, via FierceHealthcare and the Globe.
Here’s how the Globe put it:
“59 percent of hospitals statewide reported a drop in elective surgeries in 2008 and into the beginning of fiscal 2009…as more people forgo treatment, hospitals are suffering financially, industry specialists say. Their profits depend heavily on lucrative surgical procedures paid for by private insurers.” And that’s in a state that has fewer folks without health insurance than just about any other state in the country.
On the west coast, the problem is even worse. according to a CalPERS study, “One-third of private payers’ costs went to hospital profits and to subsidize a revenue gap”. Health plans paid hospitals $18 billion in 2005 for care that cost the hospitals $13 billion.
A hidden, but nonetheless significant contributor to hospitals’ woes has been the growth of high-deductible health plans. Patients with these plans seeking elective surgery often don’t have enough money in their deductible accounts to cover the deductible; hospitals are turning these patients away, unwilling to accept the risk of non-payment.
Impact on health plans
Health plans have been dealing with increasing hospital cost inflation for several years; what’s new is the worsening economy has significantly exacerbated the problem. Price has been the primary driver of hospital cost inflation; back in 2003-2004 prices jumped eight percent annually.
Healthplan giant Wellpoint saw hospital trend rates last year above ten percent; in their Q1 2009 earnings call they reported “Inpatient hospital trend is in the low double-digit range and is almost all related to increases in cost per admission. Unit costs are rising due to an elevated average case acuity and higher negotiated rate increases with hospitals.”
Aetna is also seeing significant cost inflation, driven by more services per admission, while HealthNet is enjoying cost inflation just under ten percent
The same trend hammered Coventry Health last year, leading to a big increase in their medical loss ratio, and eventually a management shakeup and re-ordering of priorities.
Impact on workers comp
Unlike group and individual health plans, workers comp patients don’t have to worry about deductibles and copays. Comp is ‘first dollar, every dollar’. And hospitals just love workers comp. Recall that workers comp generates one-fiftieth of a hospital’s revenues – and one-sixth of hospital profits It’s no wonder workers comp medical costs are starting to jump again – driven by cost shifting from hospitals desperate to make up for lost private pay patients
In recent audits (including a large self-insured employer and a workers’ comp municipal trust) the greatest year over year increase in their medical expenses was due to facility cost inflation (primarily hospitals and ambulatory surgical centers). Other clients are experiencing hospital cost trends above 10% year over year, and some are in the 12% range.
Post script – for a detailed review of the hospital perspective on the issues, click here.


May
5

So, which PBM has ‘better’ results?

A couple weeks ago the good folks at PMSI sent a copy of their excellent Drug Trends Report over for a preview before the ‘official’ release at RIMS. There’s some interesting stuff in the Report, lots of good info about cost drivers, the impact of re-branding OxyContin; the effects of price and utilization on total drug costs, and other wondrously fascinating material (I know, get a life…)
A few days ago the fine people at ExpressComp (the workers comp PBM unit of PBM giant Express Scripts) published their Drug Trend Report – and while it is noticeably shorter than their friendly competitor’s, it is nonetheless packed with insights and information.
But don’t make the mistake of trying to compare the two PBMs’ reports, as their client bases, analytical methods, data definitions, and analytical methodologies tend to be different – in some ways, quite different.
Here’s a couple ways the Express Scripts business may show different results from PMSI’s.
1. ESI services some of the largest state funds – including California and New York. With significant variation in prescribing and dispensing patterns across the country, it would be surprising if their data did NOT show differently than PMSI’s (which has some significant market share in the southeast as well as extensive national coverage).
2. PMSI doesn’t include out of network transactions; others do. Neither methodology is good or bad, they just reflect a different approach. Yet this can skew the data significantly, and make a PBM look ‘better’ or ‘worse’ depending on how you view the data.
3. Some payer clients are more sophisticated, employing strong prior auth and clinical drug management programs, and thereby reducing utilization for expensive drugs. Other payers are lazy and/or indifferent. PBMs don’t control payer behavior, rather they have to adapt to that behavior. I’m NOT saying ESI’s customers or PMSI’s are more or less savvy, just that they are undoubtedly different. And that difference is reflected in the results delivered by each PBM.
On the positive side, both companies use the same title for their publication…”Drug Trend Report” – demonstrating that consistency can actually lead to more confusion!
What does this mean for you?
When comparing two programs, or two vendors, dig deep into the data to make sure you really understand the methodologies and definitions. Otherwise you’ll not have the right info to make the correct decision.
PostScript
CompPharma LLC has been asked to help develop standardized data definitions and methodologies to enable PBMs to produce reports that will allow inter-company comparisons. If the PBM members agree to pursue this, expect the standards will be out in time for next year’s Reports.
(note I am affiliated with CompPharma)


May
4

What’s all this about socialized medicine?

To listen to the Glen Becks/Sally Pipes/Charles Krauthammers/Neil Cavutos you’d think President Obama and the Democratic Congress is 100% full-bore absolutely committed to a health system run by the Feds where all docs are Federal employees and hospitals are owned by the gub’mint.
They are nothing if not consistent in decrying ‘socialized medicine’, unfortunately they have no idea what they’re talking about. Nowhere in President Obama’s history – not in any position papers, speeches, responses to questions, or writings – is there any credible evidence of any support for a socialized health system (one where the payers and providers are government workers).
Nowhere.
This isn’t a “you say po-tay-toe, I say po-tah-toe” thing. We are not splitting hairs arguing about policy niceties or nuance, this is a flat out complete distortion of the Democratic reform platform. It is an active, aggressive, coordinated, consistent effort on the part of these wingnuts to distort the Democrats’ position and scare Americans. These right wing talking heads are not idiots, and they can read; clearly they know they’re lying.
Why?
Simple – the real Obama/Democratic health reform plans aren’t scary big government takeovers of health care; they leverage the existing private insurance industry – and don’t even assure universal coverage.
In fact, the voters might actually like the Obama plan. What’s unfortunate is by lying about the Dems’ reform initiatives, these folks have lost all credibility. They could contribute to the discussion, instead they’re standing on the side lines screaming.
What does this mean for you?
If the D’s plans were that bad, the wingnuts wouldn’t need to lie about them.


May
1

Health reform – still a long shot

OK, so the Dems will have more control over legislation when Franken joins the Senate. With PA Sen. Arlen Specter changing sides, they have passed the magic 60-vote threshold, making it theoretically possible for health reform legislation to pass without any votes from the other side of the aisle.
‘Theoretically’ being the operative word.
Before anyone starts chilling the champagne and covering the lockers with plastic, think about what hasn’t changed; health care reform – as currently conceived – is unaffordable.
None of the recent developments – or any of the current proposals (except the Wyden/Bennett Healthy Americans Act) do anything to resolve the cost issue.
And as Bob Laszewski points out today, without cost reform, there will be no health reform.


Apr
30

Physician payment reform – the first (real) trial balloon

Yesterday’s revelation of a compromise on health reform by two key Senators – a Republican and a Democrat – was the first public statement of the long-simmering plan to significantly change physician reimbursement.
It wasn’t much to start – a call to increase reimbursement for primary care services by 5% along with bumps in payments to rural physicians. But is also noted a decrease in reimbursement for other specialists. And that’s where things are going to get very contentious.
The proposal by Senators Max Baucus (D-Mont.) and Charles E. Grassley (R-Iowa) indicates there’s been significant progress between the two parties on health reform; according to the LATimes, “the senior members of the Senate Finance Committee have reached some bipartisan agreement about how the federal government should pay providers through its Medicare program.”
This bipartisan agreement, coupled with the earlier announcement of Sen Arlen Specter’s move to the Democratic party and the decision by Democrats to subject health reform to the reconciliation process (where it can pass the Senate with a simple majority) may well kick health reform into high gear. Politically, more Republicans may be realizing that a continued policy of pure obstruction will not help turn around the fortunes of the party.
With health reform a highly visible issue, at least some members of the minority party may have decided to try to steer the bus instead of continuing to lie down in front of it. Politico reported late yesterday that Rahm Emanuel met with Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell yesterday to discuss health reform – a meeting that may well indicate the GOP leader is willing to engage.
I’d expect there is some serious horse-trading going on in the back offices, and one of the chips is very likely the public plan option. If the Rs can keep that off the table in return for their acceptance of other health reform provisions, we just may see reform this year. As I’ve noted repeatedly, the protests over the public option are generally overblown. Be that as it may, killing the public option would enable Rs to claim a significant victory and retain some political capital amongst their core supporters.
What does this mean for you?
Watch what key Democrats say about the public option; a cooling of enthusiasm may well indicate a compromise is in the offing and reform may actually happen.


Apr
29

Wise on work comp – the more bills, the better

“it’s all a fee-based business, so actually the workers’ comp business, the more bills there are, the more claims there are, the better that we do.” [emphasis added]
Allen Wise, CEO, Coventry Healthcare, Q1 2009 earnings call
That was the chairman’s response to an analyst question about workers’ comp claim frequency declines – and he’s right. Coventry’s networks, bill review, case management, and other services deliver more revenue and profit when there are more injuries generating more bills.
As plain as the nose on your face, a crystal clear explanation of how Coventry profits when workers comp medical costs go up. By the company’s chair, no less.
(To quote my wonderful bride, Coventry’s incentives are “diabolically opposite” those of its clients.)
In his opening comments, Wise noted “I do feel confident that we’ll be able to improve our operating margins in the short term [emphasis added] and when the employment market returns that we will be able to demonstrate revenue growth. In summary, it’s a good business and we’re absolutely committed to it. The chairman went on to talk about the business bouncing back with the economy. Wise expects a 300 basis point ‘margin opportunity’ in comp over the next 24 months.
He didn’t say where that increased margin was coming from, but the company’s recent layoffs and price increases give a pretty good indication of what we can expect.
Wise also expressed confidence in the new management team, led by David Young. It is quite clear that the work comp unit will operate almost autonomously, with great flexibility and control over their own destiny.
No one from corporate is going to be watching over their shoulders.
According to Wise, “we have given the management group the resources of a large company in terms of IT and some of our favorable network locations but made them more autonomous, and their earnings and their bonus depends on EBITDA targets, and so, I think now that they have better control of their expenses or rather more accountable for their expenses, they’re making better business judgments…”
Can it be sold?
At RIMS I had several conversations with individuals opining that Coventry would sell off the work comp division. I think not. While it would be easy to just quote Wise’s statement of commitment, we all know how corporate-speak works – it could very well be a smokescreen to cover a transaction in the works.
But I doubt it, for a simple reason – what’s to sell?
Bill review – well, Coventry’s application is OK (see upcoming results of bill review survey for more details) but the market is limited, competitors including Medata and Mitchell are doing quite well, Coventry’s BR has always been a low margin business, they recently laid off key support staff and EDS will not support the application after this September.
Case management – seriously? who would buy a CM business these days? Perhaps for 3x ebitda, but perhaps not. This business, on the downslope for years, is cratering.
Medicare Set-Asides – what’s left to sell? What was a $30 million business is now projected to do $5 million in 2009. That, and the overhanging liability of First Health’s ill-conceived ‘guarantee’ program is causing major problems with several customers, as the customers have started to ask for payment on the basis of those ‘guarantees’. Much as they’d like to stick that in a box at the bottom of a very long mine shaft, it’s not going away.
Networks – ah, the crown jewel. Except hospital discounts are fading, the Aetna (which provides the actual network in sixteen or so states) is seeking to renegotiate their contract, and Wise himself has alluded to his concern about using goup health to get workers comp discounts (which has been causing problems since 2003). Even if they could leverage the group business’ buying power, how could they then turn around and sell the ‘workers comp network’ to another entity? Answer – they couldn’t.
FirstScript PBM – the network is accessed thru a group PBM (Caremark), pricing is low, and there isn’t much in the way of value-add. Still, the sales force under Matt Padden is pretty good, and Padden is well respected throughout the industry. On balance, one of the stronger offerings Coventry work comp has.
This is not to say Wise is not actually enthusiastic about comp – even if it is only 6% of Coventry’s total revenues. But he has way bigger fish to fry, and he’s leaving this to run on its own.
Let’s recap.
We have the dominant player in the work comp managed care business being told to increase profitability. We have an express acknowledgment by the CEO that the more bills their workers comp clients have, the better for Coventry. We have several months’ experience with the ‘kinder, gentler’ Coventry.
What does this mean for you?
Price increases, service decreases, higher medical costs.
post script – Once again I reached out to Coventry to seek their views. And once again – no response.


Apr
28

Coventry Healthcare – Q1 2009 progress report

This is a big day for mid-tier healthplan Coventry. After a year of turmoil and ups and (mostly) downs, CVTY has been under the leadership of returning CEO Allen Wise for a full quarter. Today Coventry announced Q1 results, which were projected to include earning of 24 cents a share, according to analysts surveyed by FactSet Research. The company surprised analysts when it reported earnings of 30 cents and projected 2009 revenues just under $14 billion.
The quick take – medical losses are coming under control through higher pricing, commercial membership is down, governmental plan membership is up, Coventry will exit the Medicare PFFS business, they are going to retain the workers comp business and Coventry is not for sale.
Details
While the results look pretty poor in comparison to Q1 2008, recall those results were wrong, as the company had yet to figure out its medical loss ratio problems were quite severe. On balance, this quarter looks reasonably solid.
The primary driver of improved results appears to be the renewed focus on the company’s medical loss ratio, which had slipped badly during the previous two years.
Here are some of the highlights.
– Net earnings were down about 65% due to higher expenses.
– Health plan commercial group risk MLR (medical loss ratio) was 80.9% in the quarter, down 230 basis points from the prior quarter. This is a big win as it appears the turnaround in healthplan performance has come earlier than expected.
– Commercial membership decreased 2.5% to 2.8 million. This is not good, as this is the profitable core of the company, Coventry’s bread and butter. The good news for the company was they increased pricing across most plans – this increase drove the improvement in MLR although it undoubtedly contributed to the drop in top line.
Coventry is selling more employer plans, but ingroup membership is down – people just can’t afford to pay their share of the premiums, even when subsidized by their employers. This is one of those canary-in-the-mine issues that has broad implications, far beyond this one mid-tier healthplan.
– Medicare Advantage membership was up 114,000 during the quarter; the MA MLR was 90.5% in the quarter, down 40 basis points from the prior quarter.
Medicare private fee for service (PFFS) is not doing well, and it looks like Coventry will exit this business. This business grew dramatically over the quarter, with membership up some 75,000 to 318,000, driving revenues of Wise noted Coventry’s board will have a (non scheduled) meeting April 30 which happens to be the day before Coventry has to decide whether it will stay in this business.
Don’t bet on it. If Coventry does exit the Medicare PFFS business, top line impact will be significant – likely more than a couple billion dollars.
– Medicare Part D membership of 1,501,000 grew by 570,000. Notably, Humana dumped 180,000 Part D members: these were the folks who cost the company about a buck a share in earnings in 2008 due to higher than expected costs. One analyst thinks Coventry picked up some of the members dumped by Humana…
Wise expressed confidence in the results, saying he’s “reasonably comfortable” with Q1 results. CFO Shawn Guertin made a point of noting that most growth in Part D was not in their high-tier products and he feels ‘comfortable’ as well.
Workers comp – Wise stated he is committed to maintaining and eventually growing the workers comp segment as it is profitable and returns good margins. He’s “absolutely committed to this business.” Guertin reiterated the company’s positive view of comp, saying results are very strong (or words to that effect). (work comp accounts for about 6% of Coventry’s revenue, with much of that from their PBM FirstScript).
More on this later.
Wise closed his opening comments by saying “the company is not for sale”. I’d note that few companies that are for sale advertise that fact.
What wasn’t covered
Once again, there was almost no discussion of core medical cost drivers – nothing beyond a couple lines from Wise about Coventry’s desire to invest in chronic care management for their Medicare members and two softball questions from analysts about cost drivers. (One was answered with the statement that facility unit costs and outpatient facility utilization appear to continue to be the problem. The second question referred to the company’s strategy regarding addressing unit costs by negotiating hospital contracts coming up for renewal and the potential impact of MS DRGs etc. Guertin’s answer was it is tough, hand to hand combat, about a fifth to a third of their hospital contracts come up for renewal this year… There was no declarative statement and certainly nothing substantive to say we’re focusing tightly on these areas or types of service. He did not respond to the MS DRG topic, and there was no follow up from the analyst.)
In what other industry would analysts not ask deep, penetrating questions about the underlying costs the company’s main product? Costs that are going up in the high single digits each year? Costs that are causing enrollment declines in the company’s core business? Costs that hammered the company last year, that drove the stock down by almost 90%? Costs that were acknowledged to be poorly understood in several of the calls last year?
Medical costs account for $11 billion – about 80% – of the company’s $14 billion top line – and there were two superficial questions?
Wow.


Apr
28

FDA move to hit workers comp hard

In one of those all-but-unnoticed moves that could have a dramatic effect on workers comp, the FDA has moved to ban a number of currently-dispensed pain medications, medications that are currently prescribed to many work comp claimants.
These aren’t the wildly expensive, oft-abused drugs like Actiq and Fentora, rather the list includes many old stand-bys, drugs that have long been used to manage chronic and acute pain. The list covers drugs “that include high concentrate morphine sulfate oral solutions and immediate release tablets containing morphine sulfate, hydromorphone or oxycodone.” The FDA’s concern appears to be that these drugs were in use before the current approval process became mandatory. The “Agency has serious concerns that drugs marketed without required FDA approval may not meet modern standards for safety, effectiveness, quality, and labeling.”
George Rontiris, PharmD and partner at Titan Pharmacy in New York gave me the heads’ up. George has been a strong advocate for injured workers for years; he’s one of the good guys. Here’s his take:
“There will be some manufacturers still able to make some of these drugs. The majority will be gone. This has already created huge shortages. A bottle of Oxycodone 30 mg that we used to be able to buy for $5.14 per bottle of 100 is now up to $ 39.50.
The so called increase in price due to a lack of supply is just the tip of the problem. Many of the people who have been handling their pain with these cheap generics, now cannot find them anywhere. The alternative that their doctors have come up with is switching them to other forms of medication, and unfortunately the ones that they go for are very expensive.
Our dispensing of Oxycontin (both brand and generic) has exploded. Worse yet is the explosion of Opana and Opana Er that we have been dispensing. I have even had the Endo Lab Opana Reps come into the the pharmacy 3 times telling me that they have been detailing all the MD’s about the “availability” of Opana since there is a National shortage of Roxicodone and other generic narcotics. And of course, the MD’s are eating it up.
Our wholesaler’s bill for the past two months has been up over 15% of what it usually is, and when we went over our ordering, it was clearly because of all the Opana Er, Oxycontin and Avinza that we have been forced to order.
We have been also getting hit with non-control generic problems. For example, Nitoglycerin tablets (put under tongue when a heart attack is happening) were $ 2.08 per 100, and are now $ 13.45. Toprol Xl 50mg generic which used to cost us $ 28.99 is now $84.95 . These are huge difference.”
What does this mean for you?
Mr Rontiris’ experience bodes ill for the work comp industry. The loss of these drugs will certainly drive up costs, may lead to adverse events as patients try other medications to replace their now-banned drugs, and may make it harder for patients to get medications.