Insight, analysis & opinion from Joe Paduda

Jan
9

How is California’s IMR process working out?

To date, 94 percent of medical treatment requests are approved after initial/internal UR and elevated physician-based UR.

At most, 4.7 percent of all medical treatment requests are denied.

At most.

Those are the headlines from CWCI’s just released analysis of all completed IMR decisions (see 1/8/14 report), an exhaustive and precise project that involved a manual review of each of those requests and resolution thereof.

CWCI’s summary indicates “IMR agrees with approximately 79 percent of the elevated physician-based UR decisions.”

What does this mean?

There are two main takeaways.  First, there’s no widespread denial of care to injured workers, far from it.  The research clearly demonstrates that while the vast majority of treatment requests are approved, the vast majority of the IMR decisions uphold the UR determination to deny or modify treatment. (Update)

Which leads to takeaway two.  Do not assume this means the IMR process – or UR itself is unnecessary or superfluous.  While a cursory review of the results would lead an uniformed reader to draw that conclusion, the report provides insight into the potential downside of ending UR.  The authors reviewed a study conducted by the Washington state work comp fund, known as L&I. Back in 2000, L&I stopped requiring UR for MRIs, as almost all were approved. A few years later, they looked at the volume of MRIs conducted had jumped dramatically.

Here’s what they concluded:

L&I reviewed the effect that the elimination of UR had on MRI use and found a 54 percent increase in spinal MRI scans and a 72 percent increase in lower extremity MRI scans following the elimination of utilization review, and the reviewers were unable to identify any variable other than the removal of the UR requirement that accounted for the increase in MRI utilization. [emphasis added]

Other research into California-specific utilization further emphasizes the risk of ending UR, you can find it in the report at the link above.

That said, there’s no question the volume of IMR requests is much higher than anticipated; word is the State is considering various ways to address the volume including adding other  vendors.  But focusing on results to date, it is also clear the process is working as intended – as an exception management process.

As stakeholders gain more experience with UR and IMR, I’d expect the volume of requests to decrease.

What does this mean for you?

We know now that the IMR process is not a “medical treatment denial scheme” perpetrated by carriers looking to deny care.

Far from it. 


Jan
7

Uncertainty.

That’s the best way to describe health insurance execs’ views on their business these days.  The massively-screwed-up-but-steadily-improving rollout of the federal exchange is the biggest reason for that uncertainty, but there’d be huge uncertainty even if things had gone flawlessly.

Health care providers are consolidating rapidly, increasing their negotiating leverage.  More and more physicians are working for health systems.  Some employers are dropping coverage, while others are moving to narrow-network based plans. All this against a backdrop of an aging population, increasing income inequality, major growth in Medicaid enrollment, reduced Medicare reimbursement for facilities and a possible “fix” to the fatally-flawed physician reimbursement system/mechanism.

And, the metrics they use to measure performance are in flux as well; the old measurements were fine when insurers could underwrite, adjust benefit designs, change deductibles and copays, and negotiate with providers from a position of strength.

Add to that the uncertainty over who is going to enroll via the exchanges – will there be enough “young immortals” to balance the older, sicker folks who sign up?  More importantly, how will that play out for individual health plans; Plan A isn’t concerned about the overall picture, but is very, very concerned about the demographics of their member group.

It’s no wonder senior management – and other stakeholders – are “uncertain” about the short-term, much less the longer-term.

Amongst all this confusion, there’s one thing that is clear – there isn’t going to be an “Obamacare death spiral”, at least not for three years.  The scaremongering about death spirals and adverse selection that might result from too many old folks and not enough young folks signing up is mis-informed.

There is a financial back-stop in the form of reinsurance that protects insurers from high cost claims for the next three years.  Bob Laszewski has an excellent description of the program and implications thereof here.  Funded by a tax on each insured, the program provides coverage for insurers “selling coverage on the state and federal health insurance exchanges as well as in the small group (less than 50 workers) market…”

By then, things will have settled down, insurers will have figured out what works, what doesn’t, and what they need to do to operate profitably.  Some will drop out of the exchange(s), while others will expand their service offerings and coverage areas.

What does this mean for you?

Lots of uncertainty means lots of opportunity for those aware, nimble, and stalwart enough to take advantage.  Not that there are many in this business that fit that description!


Jan
6

US health care – what we pay, and what we get

The US health care system costs way more than any other country’s, yet our health outcomes are mediocre.  At best.

An info-graphic from George Washington University helps explain what we pay and what we get.

015_Healthcare-VS-World-600

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Jan
2

Is Sedgwick for sale?

Yes.  For the right price.

Hellman & Friedman and Stone Point Capital (Sedwick’s owners) have owned the company for 3 1/2 years, paying $1.1 billion in April of 2010.  Reports indicate Sedgwick’s earnings are around $200 million. With current multiples above 10x, a price in the $2 billion range is certainly possible; don’t be shocked if the final deal is worth as much as $2.4 billion.

There are a host of reasons for the TPA’s current owners to sell the company, with the primary reason likely the high valuations currently on offer.  Doubling one’s money over four years is reason enough for the owners to consider a deal; when one considers the (high) likelihood that H&F and Stone Point undoubtedly leveraged the deal, the RoI picture becomes even more compelling.

That said, whoever buys the company will only pay a premium if they see a clear path to significant profitable growth for Sedgwick.  After acquiring many service functions (e.g. investigations, MSAs) to deliver them in-house, signing deals with most vendors to share revenues, and acquiring other TPAs, there isn’t much else that can be done to jack up margins.  Thus, it is all about the future.

And for now, the future looks bright.  As P&C premiums continue to trend upwards, self-insurance is booming, driving more revenue and profit for TPAs.  Several privately-held TPAs (York, CCMSI, TriStar – currently the largest) have grown nicely of late, and may find they are attractive acquisition candidates sometime down the road.

That said, competition in the P&C TPA business is fierce.  Gallagher-Bassett is making moves to add expertise and strengthen its offering, streamlining processes and becoming more flexible. Broadspire has been adding significant business of late.  And very large self-insureds are becoming increasingly demanding, forcing TPAs to incur significant costs to develop applications, processes, and expertise required by powerful risk managers.

All in all, it looks like the time is now to sell Sedgwick.  

Stay tuned…


Dec
20

Friday’s catchall and catch-up

It’s been a crazy busy year for all; in the run-up to the Christmas holiday I missed a few items that well deserve mention.

First, my post about female CEOs missed a couple women in that role; Liz Haar is CEO of Accident Fund Holdings Inc.  What’s worse is AFHI has been an HSA client for some time, proving I can on occasion be dense as a rock . Artemis Emslie runs myMatrixx, one of the more innovative workers’ comp PBMs.  Deborah Pfeifle was also disappointed I forgot about her.

My apologies to you all; I’ll strive to do better in the future.

On the good news front, medical trend is at an all-time low, with inflation running 1.3 percent since 2010.  That is nothing short of amazing/incredible/mind-boggling.  As a result, CBO projections of Medicare/medicaid spending over the next six years is down $147 billion, or 0.6% of GDP.

On a more esoteric note, CMS announced they are cutting reimbursement for interventional pain procedures; epidural steroid injections will be lowered by 36%+,  fees for spinal cord stimulation and kyphoplasty will be cut as well.  Here’s the issue; interventional pain docs may decide non-work comp patients aren’t worth their time, and focus even more on work comp. Comp payers should very carefully monitor interventional pain docs and claimants treated by those docs and be alert for practice or treatment plan changes.  

(this is the letter ASIPP is requesting docs send to their representatives…)

Finally, a piece from JAMA provides sobering statistics on why health care in America is so expensive.  (thank you to Vincent Drucker for the tip, and kudos to the Incidental Economist for posting on it long before I did)

  • 84% of medical costs are for the treatment of chronic conditions
  • Price increases – not utilization – accounted for 91% of medical cost increases since 2000.  Price is driving cost, with hospitals increasing the most.
  • The aging of the population is pretty much a non-factor, while provider consolidation is a major contributor to pricing power.
  • IT is a driver as well; “investment has occurred but value is elusive.”

So what’s to make of the super-low inflation numbers while historical research indicates prices are up?  Couple things spring to mind.

First, CBO numbers are for total spend, and governmental programs have done quite well in controlling cost; commercial payers not so much (except in Mass, where average group health premiums have gone down over the last two years!)

Second, the JAMA piece includes data from the 2000 decade while CBO is just 2010 on.  Different sample set.

What does this mean for you?

Taking all these cost items together, watch out for cost-shifting!


Dec
19

Work Comp Predictions for 2014 – Part 2

Okay, the easy ones are done.  Now it’s on to the tough, out-of-nowhere predictions, the ones that make – or more likely break, any reputation as a prognosticator.

6. Aetna will not sell its work comp business.  Even though some really smart folks (and people I respect) in the PE world think otherwise, I just don’t see it happening. I should have bet David Donn…(see comments section in the link).

7.  Someone is going to buy Stratacare.  OK, I know this appears to conflict with my earlier statement that the deal flow is going to slow down, but it really doesn’t.  There’ve been, what, a gazillion deals in work comp services this year?  So half-a-gazillion is less, right?

Anyways, Coventry needs a bill review platform (but I don’t think they’ll buy S-care).  Methinks it will be Mitchell; their new owners could consolidate a LOT of the work comp bill review business.  While that may appear to be a market-dominating move, don’t discount Medata and MCMC.  Agile, quick, and aggressive, these companies are taking share at the expense of the big boys – and will continue to if the “boys” become “boy”.

8.  Frequency will level off – somewhat.  Except for the recession-driven increase a few years back, claim frequency has steadily declined, averaging 2-4 percentage points per year.  With employment up, the economy improving, and manufacturing, logistics, construction, health care and energy all strengthening I’d expect frequency’s perennial decline to end, or at least moderate quite a bit.

9.  Guidelines are going to get a lot more attention – and more regulatory support.  I’m doubling down on last year’s prediction that guideline usage would grow; with the release of ACOEM’s drug formulary, Minnesota’s adoption of back surgery guidelines, the great work of PCORI, and Medata’s analysis of the impact of guidelines on cost the pressure on regulators to add more science to the art of work comp medical care is growing daily.

10.  The train wreck that is senior management at the North Dakota State Fund will continue to demonstrate the perils of politically-driven leadership.  After sacking one of the best senior execs in the industry on BS charges, WSI has:

Under state law, an audit is supposed to be conducted right about now.  Haven’t heard what firm will be conducting the audit, but if past history is any guide, expect a whitewash. We can expect continued screwups as the far-in-over-their-heads “leadership” of WSI makes a mockery of management.

The tragedy here is there are a lot of very capable, competent, and diligent folks at WSI, working every day to do the right thing.  They and the workers of NoDak deserve far better leadership.

There you have it.  One more day to go for this “business” year, and then it’s off for a couple weeks.

 


Dec
18

Work Comp Predictions for 2014

Proving once again that I’m not smart enough to leave well enough alone, it’s time for my annual predictions for the coming year. I’m putting on my Carnac costume, examining tea leaves, and stopped by the butcher to get ready for some haruspicating – that’s analyzing sheep entrails (and yep, that’s a legitimate future forecasting technique)…

liver map

So here’s what’s going to happen in 2014. I hope.

1. Overall, the work comp insurance market will be steady.  Employment is slowly picking up, manufacturing and construction are doing ok, and premium rates are level to a bit higher.  This will mean more business for TPAs, slightly higher premiums for employers (and insurance companies), and more focus on loss prevention and risk management.

2.  More consolidation in the TPA market is on the horizon.  Expect some of the mid-tier TPAs to grow via acquisition, and there may be a deal involving one of the larger ones as well.

3.  Medical trend – on a paid, not incurred basis – will increase by at least a couple of points.  The ongoing problem of facility costs, coupled with cost-shifting and a lack of focus on (real) medical management on the part of most payers will be the drivers.

4.  Deal activity for mid-sized to large transactions in the work comp services sector will taper off.  There’s one more big transaction in process, but after that gets done there just aren’t that many big companies left to sell.  Expect to see a couple transactions but nothing like we’ve seen in 2013.

5.  At least one – and likely more – insurers will discover the real impact of opioids on their claims costs, and the impact will affect their reserves, rating, and/or financial stability.  As of now, few carriers have split out the cost of claims with and without opioids, and when they do, they are in for a (financial) shock.

More tomorrow!


Dec
17

Predictions for work comp in 2013; how’d I do – part 2

So far, not bad.  Let’s see how my other prognostications worked out…

  1. Several more states will adopt clinical guidelines to help determine appropriate/medically necessary care.
    There’s no doubt clinical guidelines help reduce unnecessary, even dangerous care.  A paper published by Medata and ACOEM explores the issue in detail.  Two states (NM and WY) adopted guidelines early this year, NY has continued, albeit slowly, to roll out more guidelines, and Washington continues to lead the way on opioid-related issues.  That said, there is much left to be done.  I’d have to give this a partial yes, as it hasn’t happened as quickly as I predicted, or anywhere near fast enough.
  2. We will learn that physician dispensing of repackaged drugs has harmed patients.
    Yes, definitely.  Research published by CWCI, and an article authored by Johns Hopkins University and Accident Fund (to be published in 2014) both prove physician dispensing leads to longer disability duration and more medical treatment. Both use case-mix adjusted data, both come from stellar research organizations, and both put the lie to dispensing companies’ claims that outcomes are improved.
  3. The good folks at NCCI will finally schedule a credible liberal speaker for their annual meeting.
    Nope.  While David Gergen was excellent, he is NOT a liberal (or conservative for that matter).  Still waiting for NCCI to get a bit more “fair and balanced”…
  4. The level of interest and activity around opting out of workers’ comp will increase – significantly.
    I’d have to say no.  While Oklahoma is moving forward, and there are rumblings from some other states, there isn’t much of a movement or any discernible trend.
  5. Predictive modeling for claims management will come of age.
    I should have worded this more precisely, as there’s no metric we can use to say yea or nay.  That said, predictive modeling is much more widespread these days than in 2012, with many large and small payers employing some type of modeling on the front end of claims and at various times during the life of the claim.  So this is a yes.

Overall, I got 6 right, 2 partially right, and 2 flat out wrong.  Yikes, that’s barely passing…

Hope to do better in 2014.  Those predictions coming up later this week.


Dec
16

Predictions for work comp in 2013 – how did I do?

It’s that time of year – I get to revisit my predictions for 2013, an often-humbling experience for someone who spends far too much time out on the bleeding edge. So, here goes.

  1. Vendor consolidation – I said “we ain’t seen nothing yet…Expect several of the larger players to join forces/be acquired/become platform companies that PE firms use to build large, diverse providers.
    A resounding yes.  First OneCall’s string of deals, KKR’s acquisition of Mitchell, then the blockbuster OneCall/Align move, then Progressive/PMSI, with at least one more big one in progress today.
  2. Higher medical costs driven by facilities.
    Yes – especially in California as health system consolidation continues. We are also seeing it in other states as physician practices are bought up by hospitals, who can then bill for facility fees on top of physician charges.  Many payers are seeing double-digit trend rates.
  3. Continued ignorance of opioids’ impact on long-term costs and outcomes, coupled with inaction by most payers.
    I’d give this a partial yes.  The opioid survey we just completed revealed that many payers are actively involved in opioid management, although those programs are typically disjointed and not integrated.  However, very few payers, if any, have estimated the long term cost of opioids.  Most don’t separate out claimants prescribed opioids from those that aren’t, lumping all claimants with the same diagnosis together.  Once they start separating out (for example) back claims with and without opioids, there will be an “oh crap” moment followed by a lot of finger-pointing.
  4. Aetna will keep – and grow – their workers’ comp service business

    Well, it isn’t growing, but they are keeping it.  Aetna has been the bridesmaid on a couple of deals, as they are looking to expand via acquisition as well as incremental sales.  And no, the departures of Rob Gelb and David Young do NOT mean mother Aetna wants to dump the business.

  5. Physician dispensing of repackaged drugs – we’ll see higher prices in some states and much more physician dispensing in many.

    Oh heck yes.  WCRI’s latest reports indicate costs are up, and so is volume in many states.  My best guess is the industry – employers, taxpayers, insurers – are paying over a billion dollars more than necessary due to the plundering profiteers in the physician dispensing business.Okay, that was the first five.  Five more tomorrow – hopefully I’ll break even…

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