Insight, analysis & opinion from Joe Paduda

Nov
18

Health care and the Super Committee – the cost of failure

The chances that the Congressional Super-Committee will achieve its stated goal of cutting $1.5 trillion from federal expenditures over the next decade are fading fast.
What happens when the six Republicans and six Democrats can’t agree on cuts?
Big – really big – increases in costs for health plans and workers comp payers. I’ll get to that in a minute, but first let’s walk thru what happens if the Supers can’t agree.
Theoretically automatic, almost-across-the-board cuts in military, entitlement program, and ongoing operational budgets go into effect 1/1/2013.
Don’t bet on it.
The threat of across-the-board cuts was supposed to motivate/force the Supers to hammer out their differences and get to a solution. All reports indicate that isn’t going to happen, as the Republicans refuse to contemplate any form of tax increases and Democrats, who believe they’ve given enough on the entitlement side, refuse to go further unless the GOP budges on taxes.
The looming threat of across the board cuts has become a good deal less likely to happen as politicians on both sides acknowledge that the threat is just that – a threat – and not much more. As with any bill passed by Congress, the threat can be overturned when/if Congress passes another bill overturning the original law.
That’s probably what the GOP members are banking on. If they are able to maintain control of the House, take over the majority in the Senate, and win the Presidency in next fall’s elections (a distinct possibility), Republicans will be able to do what they wish. I’d expect immediate action to rescind cuts in military spending, extend the Bush tax cuts for top earners, and slash entitlement spending.
From a political perspective, it’s hard to see the GOP members of the Super Committee agreeing to ANY agreement that could be construed as increasing taxes. And that’s exactly what is required to reach a deal with their Democratic colleagues.
So, what does this mean for health care?
My sense is the biggest short term effect may well be on Medicare physician reimbursement. Remember, there’s no solution on the table for the 27.5% cut in Medicare physician reimbursement scheduled to take effect in exactly six weeks. There’s little focus on this as all eyes are on the Supers, but that will change in early December as the AMA marshals its forces to attack Congress. I don’t see a solution before the end of the year, so get ready for an increasingly nasty and public screaming match as politicians of all stripes seek to blame someone else.
If this gets really vitriolic, we could be looking at massive physician ‘dis-enrollment’ from Medicare.
Both parties will try to develop short term solutions to kick the can even further down the road, but the SGR issue (the shorthand term for Medicare’s physician reimbursement ‘methodology’), as big as it is, is nowhere near as significant, nor as important politically, as the budget battle.
What does this mean for you?
If the cuts go into effect, cost-shifting to private payers is going to explode from today’s already outrageous level to one that will drive trend rates through the roof.


Nov
17

Treating chronic pain: alternatives to opioids

After all the discussion of drugs and their role in pain management, and the problems inherent in using drugs for pain.
MedRisk CEO Shelley Boyce introduced experts from the Netherlands and the US. There are several key differences between the US and the Netherlands. The Dutch health care system is compulsory and based on managed competition between insurers; consumers can switch insurers yearly without penalty. The disability system is employer based with total annual costs of about 465 million euros.
Rehab centers are licensed, with Ciran one of the largest providers with annual revenue of about 16.6 million euros. Interestingly Ciran operates on a franchise model, with uniform operating standards and guidelines. Ciran doesn’t use any medications in their work, instead relying on their structured approach, inclusion of cognitive behavioral therapy, and pre-planned treatment course that is developed in advance of treatment. Patient progress and achievement of goals are measured weekly.
Ciran’s outcomes are remarkable.
In a population where 77% present with musculoskeletal, pain, and mental health problems; and a large percentage have ‘claims’ more than two years old. Clearly these are tough patients. The data presented by Ciran clearly indicate improvements in physical function, reduced levels of depression and anxiety, and improved coping over the 16 week treatment regimen. Health complaints are also dramatically reduced and health status improved.
The session’s final speaker reported that fully 13.5% of the US population were treated for spine issues in 2006. Over the ten years before 2006, inpatient costs went up 53%, medications more than doubled, and overall cost of treatment doubled.
Yet there was no discernible improvement, and the data actually indicate functional health status of patients declined across several metrics over the same period.
That’s right: cost of spinal care doubled and outcomes were worse.
The presentation continued with what can only be described as a debunking of ideas and concepts that are commonly accepted as truisms. Spinal issues are not caused by injuries but rather by genetically-driven disc degeneration due to – you guessed it – aging.
The implications are enormous. Work activities account for 1% of disc degeneration, genetics accounts for 74%.
Back pain isn’t caused by accidents or work-related injuries or disc degeneration but by genetics. And there is no real association between herniated discs, bulging discs, or even ruptured discs and pain.
This is big news and deserves a dedicated post. I’ll do that next week.


Nov
17

Controlling work comp drug costs: does Washington have the answer?

This year the WCRI meeting has a strong focus on chronic pain, narcotic utilization and the impact thereof. Three of the sessions were devoted to the topic, a reflection of the primary importance of pain and opioid use for the work comp industry.
Washington State’s monopolistic work comp insurer spent a paltry 4% if total medical costs in drugs. In contrast, payers in the rest of the country saw drugs consume just under 20% of total medical costs. This was one of the findings reported at yesterday’s afternoon session.
As a monopolistic payer, the state fund (Labor and Industry or L&I) has a lot of power, share, and regulatory authority about which payers in other states can only dream. L&I has a tight formulary, strict generic mandate, tight limits on physician dispensing, bill submission and processing, fee schedule and other controls that undoubtedly help keep drug costs quite low.
Generic fill is at 88%, well above almost all other payers.
While many of these programs/regs/policies might well be helpful in other states, remember they are in place in a state dominated by one very large payer. Pharmacies don’t wonder where to send their bills nor if a drug will be covered. They also know howuch they will be paid and when. Eligibility is quickly verified. Physicians are well aware of the formulary and generic mandate.
Most of these are only possible in a monopolistic state.
That was precisely the point made by the last speaker, PMSI CEO Eileen Auen.
Eileen reported that theres no difference in generic efficiency berween states with and without generic mandates.
Regarding fee schedules, Auen noted that there’s no correlation between low fee schedules and drug costs, citing data indicating California which has the lowest fee schedule, has costs right at the median. New York which also has an extremely low fee schedule, exhibits costs in the highest quintile.


Nov
16

Workers comp hospital costs – perspective from Indiana and Virginia

After Dr Barth’s high level background we dove head first into the details of hospital costs and trends and management thereof.
Indiana’s Linda Hamilton shared insights into hospital cost regulation in IN, a state with a rather inadequate cost control history. Hamilton noted the substantial increase in providers appealing work comp payments for their services. A usual and customary state, IN has seen rather significant hospital cost growth, perhaps in part due to the lack of comparable hospital charge data on which to base “usual and customary”. Many of these were addressed by paying bills at the 80th percentile, However as there wasn’t adequate comparable data, the state didn’t really know on what to base payment.
As a result, the cost of inpatient care went up 93% from 2003-2007, and there is no real solution in sight.
Hamilton showed slides indicating wide variation in the cost for similar services within the state: neighboring states are seeing much lower costs. That’s one reason medical costs account for 75% of losses in the state.
If you are expecting a happy ending you’ll have to keep that patience cap on…However Hamilton did note that the state is working on a certified database to help address the difficulty in ascertaining an “appropriate” reimbursement.
Mike Paladino, a WC claim and management exec from a health care system in Richmond, then entertained the audience with a revealing view of the financials of his system.
75% of their revenue is government paid. Paladino asserted that Medicare and Medicaid both reimburse below the actual cost of providing those services; medicare at 80% of costs and Medicaid at 94%. Clearly the health system has to cover those shortfalls by getting private insurers – and workers comp – to pay way more than cost.

A thoughtful and knowledgeable speaker, Paladino noted the services provided by the system benefit society as a whole. He did not claim that the cost shifting that occurs at the system is good bad or indifferent, but it is absolutely clear that it occurs.
My takeaway?
This is a hidden tax on employers and burden on taxpayers and insurers.


Nov
16

WCRI’s opening talk – how we got here

The fall conference schedule comes to a close with this week’s annual WCRI meeting in Boston. I’ll be posting from my iPhone as the wifi access fee is $100(!) so watch out for typos…
Peter Barth began with a history of work comp, with particular emphasis on the societal issues that helped give rise to Wisconsin’s first in the nation state comp laws. (more accurately the first WC law that survived legal challenges) Barth noted that one county in PA had more than five hundred workplace fatalities one year in the early nineteen-hundreds.
The National Commission on WC and the impact thereof was discussed in some detail. For the non-work comp folks out there, the Commission led to rather remarkable changes in many state work comp systems by shining a very bright light on the differences among and between the various states. By developing and promulgating universal objectives, the Commission helped accelerate the pace of change and modernization in those states that had long lagged more progressive jurisdictions.
This being the anniversary of the passage of Wisconsin’s comp law, there have been many reviews of the history of comp; Barth’s presentation was one of the better ones. Perhaps the most revealing takeaway was the drastic change in medical benefits from the early days.
Barth reported that several states allowed claimants a maximum of fourteen days to obtain medical care, two states had rather brief medical benefits periods (Massachusetts with 14 days) as late as1940.
Next up for public consumption is a discussion of pharmacy costs – which is a subject near and dear indeed.
.


Nov
11

Report from Vegas, day two

Amidst about a dozen meetings yesterday there was precious little time to catch up on the latest and greatest vendor offerings, greet old friends and colleagues, and sit down and learn from experts.
But I did pick up on a few things of note.
Excellent session on chronic pain led by Broadspire medical director Jake Lazarovic MD. Dr Jake discussed warning signs indicating potential risk for chronic pain that would trigger interventions, as well as the processes and tools (e.g. case management, peer review, referral to an addiction management provider) to address those claims. The tools/processes go under the overall title “Pain Central”, a catchy term that helps focus internal and prospect – attention on an integrated solution.
The award for most new booths goes to the surgical implant cost control business. There were several new entrants, as well as a featured spot within MSC’s booth for their new service line.
Examworks’ by-no-well-recognized huge booth was staffed by hordes of orange-clad folk extolling the benefits of awarding all your IME business to the big player. Meanwhile, competitor MCN had a much more visible presence at the show than is typical for them. Sources indicate MCN’s business is growing, rather significantly, despite, or perhaps in part because, of EXAM’s rapid expansion.
Lots of rumors floating around, including a report of ESIS leaving Coventry for another bill review vendor. This would be a rather substantial loss for the industry-dominator, so we’ll keep you posted.
I’m hoping conference boss Nancy Grover can convince the authorities to schedule the annual daylight savings time change to fall during the conference; the extra hour of sleep would be most welcome.
After I’ve recovered from the frenzy of the last three days I’ll post a more thoughtful and less random review.
For now, safe travels home from Vegas, and for many, see you next week at WCRI in Boston


Nov
10

Disclosure, cranky lawyers and bad actors

So, what happened yesterday at the comp conference?
Lots. Two work comp execs agreed to sit in front of a couple thousand people while being grilled by an opinionated and occasionally-combative interviewer, an event about as rare as a Rick Perry-Mitt Romney group hug. And in a clear demonstration of his commitment to full financial transparency Sedgwick’s Dave North agreed to share his vendor contracts with customers.
Kudos to Dave for his bold stance.
Local Las Vegas attorneys got really mad at Chris Brigham for his involvement in impairment ratings and discussion of Nevada’s…”challenges”. Mad enough for conference organizers to hire security for Chris very-well-attended talk yesterday when threats to disrupt were made.
A much-needed and by all accounts well-done and even handed presentation on medical foods by Progressive’s Tron Emptage was interrupted by a rather belligerent representatative of Physician Therapeutics Inc., the firm behind much of the physician dispensing of medical foods in CA. Methinks the inciden confined the very point Tron was making; there are good and bad actors in the medical foods business; Tron singled out HSA client Primus as one of the good actors.
More later…


Nov
8

The Sandy Blunt story; good news at last

For what seems like years I’ve been reporting on Sandy Blunt’s case and his ongoing and till now fruitless effort to clear his name.
Today we got some good news.
Sandy has long contended the prosecutor, Cynthia Feland, withheld key information that proved he (sandy) did not commit a felony. Today, a North Dakota court agreed, stating:
” The Panel concludes Cynthia M. Feland did not disclose to Michael Hoffman, defense attorney for Charles Blunt, the Wahl memo, and other documents which were evidence or information known to the prosecutor that tended to negate the guilt of the accused…”
Feland, now a sitting elected judge, has had her attorney’s license suspended and has been ordered to pay court costs.
This is not the end of the story. Feland will undoubtedly appeal. But she may well find the more she tries to justify her actions the worse it gets for her.
Beyond this specific issue lies the complete failure of the North Dakota justice system and particularly the Supreme Court. That august body refused to grant Sandy a new trial even when it was confronted with the same evidence that he was wrongfully convicted.
One would hope they feel at least some small embarrassment, if not shame at their complete abdication of responsibility.
One would hope.


Nov
7

Opioids in work comp – problem solved!

I received a welcome email from a colleague Friday with the news that one company has solved a problem of monumental proportions that has bedeviled many a payer, regulator, employer and claimant – the rampant abuse of opioids.
Imagine my surprise and delight. The $1.4 billion catastrophe that has driven up costs for employers, kept many injured workers out of work for far too long, devastated families and led to addiction and diversion – is now fixed.
Talk about making my day!
I eagerly opened the email link, my fingers tripping over each other in my haste to discover who had achieved this epic success. As I waited for the link to open, my mind was filled with wonder at the achievement! Who could have done this? How could we reward them? For truly this wondrous accomplishment deserves all the recognition the industry can possibly confer!!!
At last (it was actually microseconds, but such was my excitement that it seemed like it took FOREVER) a window opened, and the screen filled!
It was none other than Integrated Prescription Solutions, formerly known as WorkCompRx.
Amazed. Stunned. Blown away. That was my reaction.
My bright hopes instantly burned to ashes as I read the screen. Imagine my pure, unadulterated shock; the bottomless pit of disappointment filled with crushed hope into which I fell as I discovered the party that had claimed this transcendental success.
For IPS/WorkComp Rx is the same company that, a mere two years ago, had taken my copyrighted work and without my permission, used it in a marketing presentation. Moreover, this company mischaracterized the work in such a way that it appeared I endorsed their approach and business model, if not them specifically.
Now, perhaps they had changed their ways, and had actually found the Holy Grail of opioid abuse prevention.
Alas, it was not to be. As I read their website, it became abundantly clear that while the name had changed, the company had not. In fact, I’m not sure they have progressed at all over the last two years.
There was precious little about opioids, and no “solution” I could find. Nope, same old marketing-speak claiming best-in-class this and industry-leading that. A mention here and there of opioids and utilization control but nothing new, insightful, innovative or even remotely promising.
There are no miracle solutions, no instant results. There is just hard work, careful analysis, thorough attention to detail, and persistent efforts. That’s what it will take to reduce the problem of opioids in workers comp.
Anyone who tells you they’ve “solved” the problem either a) doesn’t understand the problem – at all; or, b) doesn’t think you do.


Nov
3

Opioids in work comp – gaining visibility

Most workers’ comp executives have moved opioid abuse and overuse to the top of their “we’ve got to fix this now” list.
Those who haven’t, should.
Here’s why.
Employers and insurers will spend $1.4 billion on narcotics this year; the vast majority of those dollars will pay for opioids – OxyContin, Percoset, Actiq, Vicodin and the like.
In all likelihood, hundreds of claimants are dying every year as a direct result of opioid abuse.
There’s very little credible evidence that long term opioid use is appropriate treatment for work comp injuries. These are drugs primarily developed – and approved by the FDA for – treating end-stage cancer pain. Not much cancer in work comp.
There’s ample evidence that long term opioid use leads to longer claim duration, long term disability, higher costs and much more medical expense. And that’s on top of the damage it does to relationships, families, and society.
The insurance industry is beginning to focus on this as a critical problem, one that, although it is societal in nature, directly and dramatically affects employers and policyholders. Regulators and legislators are also keenly interested; I participated in an IAIABC webinar earlier this week along with Dr Kathryn Mueller, Medical Director for Colorado’s work comp system and Dr Gary Franklin, Medical Director for the Washington State Fund. There were more than 170 folks on the call, a clear indication of how important the issue is.
The big insurance trade groups are also addressing opioid use, driven by members looking for so-far elusive solutions to a problem costing their policyholders billions in added, unnecessary cost.
It is also going to be the subject of at least one session in next week’s workers comp conference and is on the agenda for WCRI later on this month as well.
This is long overdue but nonetheless very, very welcome.
To quote Gary Franklin MD, this is a “hair on fire” issue – and if your hair’s not on fire yet, you’re either a) bald or b) not paying attention.


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 2025. 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