*This blog post was originally published at EverythingHealth*
The methodology of this “survey” is not really honest. They cherry-picked an insurance database looking for the highest billed charges for various CPT codes. Supposedly they “excluded high charge outliers that may reflect billing or coding errors.” Really? How on earth, one wonders, could they have concluded that an office visit billed at 5,000% the medicare rate was not an error? Were there more outrageous charges that were excluded? Sounds fishy.
Moreover, the survey is promoted as exposing the outrageous fees that doctors charge, when in no way are these fees representative of physician fees. Physician fees, as any other group of data points, fall into a more-or-less normal distribution. There’s a median point around which most practices cluster, and the further out you get the fewer physicians that are charging those fees, high or low. The cited fees are certainly in the 3+ standard deviation tail of this graph, but you wouldn’t know it from the AHIP press release.
They present these outrageous charges as if they are accurate and as if they represented a widespread abuse of consumers by greedy doctors.
The annoying thing about this is that there is a valid argument to be made that the uninsured do face higher fees than the insured. This is of course more of a factor with the much-higher hospital costs, but physician fees are also higher for the uninsured. The reason for this is that insurers demand a discount off the standard fee in order to contract with physicians. This gives physicians an incentive to crank up their fee schedule as high as they can get away with.
So if UnitedHealth comes to me and offers to pay me 75% of billed charges (I wish!), I need to make sure that my fee schedule puts that figure at a level that is going to return a reasonable per-patient compensation. This is less of an issue nowadays, since most insurers prefer to settle on a conversion factor and contract by the RVU, or as a percentage of the standard medicare rates (110-150% most commonly). That’s easier for their billing systems to manage. So there is less incentive for us to keep charges high. But still, a few insurance plans like to do the old way, and there are occasional patients who are insured but we don’t have a contract with their insurer. In those cases, we expect compensation in full, and the insurer usually pays some arbitrary sum that they feel is reasonable, with the patient responsible for the balance.
Does this screw the folks without insurance? Yes, to a degree. Most of the uninsured don’t pay a dime. They just throw out the doctor’s bill, along with the much-bigger hospital bill, and we wind up writing it off as bad debt. Most hospitals, and our practice, will also write it off as charity if the patient asks for it and can show some hardship. So the uninsured will get a huge bill, but they very very rarely have to pay a huge bill.
The ultimate solution for this “problem” of the uninsured being “overcharged” is not, as AHIP implies, to somehow regulate physician charges, but to eliminate the uninsured. Get everybody covered under some sort of insurance plan, and this problem goes away.
*This blog post was originally published at Movin' Meat*
There has been a lot of talk about the way in which a public health insurer would compete against private ones. As the President put it recently:
People say, well, how can a private company compete against the government? And my answer is that if the private insurance companies are providing a good bargain, and if the public option has to be self-sustaining — meaning taxpayers aren’t subsidizing it, but it has to run on charging premiums and providing good services and a good network of doctors, just like any other private insurer would do — then I think private insurers should be able to compete. They do it all the time.
He makes a good point. But we don’t have to talk about this in theory – we can look at existing state insurance programs to see how they operate.
In states prone to natural disasters like hurricanes, the market for private insurance has become increasingly uncompetitive. Several state governments have responded by setting up public insurance programs to sell coverage to property owners in their states. They operate something like private insurance companies – collecting premiums, maintaining reserves, and, importantly, buying reinsurance in the event of a catastrophe that exceeds what they can pay for themselves.
The New York Times reports that a number of the state insurers are thinking of doing something that a private insurer would likely never do: dropping their reinsurance coverage. It could save hundreds of millions of dollars a year. But it would expose them to billions of dollars in risk – that they likely would be unable to pay. The Times calls it “running naked through storm risks.”
Why can they do this?
I suspect that in the event of a bad hurricane that depleted their reserves, these insurers believe they can turn to the state or federal government to cover their losses. They are acting as if they already have a sort of “free” reinsurance from the government. Or, to use a modern expression, they are assuming they will get a bail out if something bad happens.
What it means is that these companies aren’t running anything like a private insurer. By not accounting for the cost of a catastrophe, they aren’t dealing with the real insurance risk they are taking. As long as a disaster doesn’t happen they save money. But when (not if) a major hurricane hits, they will be swept away in the storm, leaving the state and federal government – and the rest of us – with the bill.
“It’s typical of governments today to not be willing to make the hard decisions that are necessary to face up to the true risks and the true costs of the policies that they’ve undertaken,” said Robert Hartwig, president of the Insurance Information Institute, an industry group.
The Times says there are some efforts underway to formalize this sort of “implicit guarantee” from the government. That might be a step in the right direction if it forces everyone to grapple with the extent of this risk.
But what we see with these kinds of insurers is one of the important ways in which public insurers really aren’t the same as private ones.
*This blog post was originally published at See First Blog*
…in four parts, from Paul Levy’s blog.
It is, says Paul, “From a friend of a friend,” and it starts thus…
My son is sleeping right now…had a rough weekend – his blood pressure dropped, his blood count was decreasing, and he had chest and neck pain. The clinical team adjusted his meds, gave him a unit of blood, and are now trying to figure out what to do next. He is scared and worried and wants so desperately to be “normal” again. He is scheduled for leg surgery this afternoon and then we wait to see what the next steps will be.
While I have a few quiet moments, I thought I’d document the story of how he made it this far….it is a story of extraordinary luck and a fair amount of clinical heroism.
My son was born 17 years ago with transposition of the great arteries (his heart had over-rotated and was pumping in a way that didn’t allow oxygenated blood to move from the lungs to the body and back again) so he had a 9 hour operation at a week old to reconstruct his heart.
…read the rest of part one
Here, in my opinion, is the best passage from the entire saga…
My son is receiving absolute top-notch care from the only place in the area that could have saved him, but was by luck, not by any “consumerism” on our part – we didn’t Google “teenage arterial switch survivor with heart attack” or pull up HealthGrades to find the best hospital or doctors to treat him….we have benefited from the kindness and skill of a community of health care providers affiliated with a hospital that was uniquely situated to help him, but the only choice we had in this was what hospital to drive him to.
…
In part 2, we learn the reason for the young man’s sudden collapse…
We learned much later that the problem that caused the heart attack was due to his reconstructive surgery when he was a baby…as he grew and became more active, one of the reimplanted coronary arteries became pinched between the rebuilt pulmonary artery and the aorta….this was an inevitable result of the surgery that saved his life 17 years ago and would have happened at some point – while swimming, riding his bike, walking in the neighborhood, playing lacrosse, or running by himself in the neighborhood as he trained for cross country….so the fourth link – he happened to have his attack while at a school with trainers equipped with an AED, with coaches and parents and teammates right there ready and able to help him. He wasn’t alone….and he was in the best possible place to have his attack (even though he complicated things a bit by having it in the woods and falling down a steep bank)
…
Congenital cardiovascular abnormalities, especially anomalous coronary arteries, are amongst the commonest of causes of sudden cardiac death in athletes.1 Ramona had posted about a young man who collapsed and died during the Little Rock Marathon in 2008. That unfortunate young athlete had a rare disease of the coronary arteries.
Coronary artery anomalies constitute 1–3% of all congenital malformations of the heart. In approximately 0.46–1% of the normal population, anomalies of the coronary arteries are found incidentally during catheter angiography or autopsy. The etiology of coronary artery anomalies is still uncertain. Maternal transmission of some types has been suggested, particularly when only a single coronary artery is involved. Familial clustering is also reported for one of the most common anomalies, in which the left circumflex coronary artery (CX) originates from the right sinus of Valsalva. Anomalies of the coronary arteries may also be associated with Klinefelter’s syndrome and trisomy 18 (i.e., Edwards syndrome). Cardiac causes for early and sudden infant death include anomalies of the coronary arteries; the Bland-White-Garland-Syndrome may be one relevant cause. Anomalies of the coronary arteries found in children may be associated with other congenital anomalies of the heart like Fallot’s syndrome, transposition of the great arteries, Taussig-Bing heart (double-outlet right ventricle), or common arterial trunk.2
Normal Coronary Arterial Anatomy
Common variants are anomalies with origin from the contralateral side of the aortic bulb. These include an origin of the LMA or the LAD from the RSV or the proximal RCA and an origin of the RCA from the LSV or the LMA. There are four possible pathways for these aberrant vessels to cross over to their regular peripheral locations: (1) “anterior course” ventral to the pulmonary trunk or the right ventricular outflow tract, (2) “interarterial course” between the pulmonary artery and aorta, (3) “septal course” through the interventricular septum, and (4)”retro-aortic course”. Clinically, course anomalies of the coronary arteries are subdivided into “malignant” and “non-malignant” forms. Malignant forms are associated with an increased risk of myocardial ischemia or sudden death and mostly show a course between the pulmonary artery and aorta (i.e., “interarterial”). The most common case is an origin of the RCA from the LSV that courses between the aortic bulb and the pulmonary artery. Anomalies of the LMA or the LAD arising from the RSV with a similar course are associated with higher cardiac risk, too. It is suggested that myocardial ischemia and sudden death result from transient occlusion of the aberrant coronary artery, due to an increase of blood flow through the aorta and pulmonary artery during exercise or stress. The reason is either a kink at the sharp leftward or rightward bend at the vessel’s ostium or a pinch-cock mechanism between the aorta and pulmonary artery. Up to 30% of such patients are at risk for sudden death.2
…
The young man in this story probably had something like this after the surgical correction (Arterial Switch Operation) for TGA…
“Malignant” course of LAD
…a classical malignant course of the LAD between the Aorta and Pulmonary artery.
…
References:
Start Slide Show with PicLens Lite 
*This blog post was originally published at scan man's notes*
Is social media a fad? Watch this video and come to your own conclusions:
Thanks to Marian Swan from Linked In’s Social Media and Health Care group for circulating this around as seen on UnMarketing Blog.
*This blog post was originally published at Dr. Gwenn Is In*
It’s no secret that doctors are disappointed with the way that the U.S. healthcare system is evolving. Most feel helpless about improving their work conditions or solving technical problems in patient care. Fortunately one young medical student was undeterred by the mountain of disappointment carried by his senior clinician mentors…
I am proud to be a part of the American Resident Project an initiative that promotes the writing of medical students residents and new physicians as they explore ideas for transforming American health care delivery. I recently had the opportunity to interview three of the writing fellows about how to…
Book Review: Is Empathy Learned By Faking It Till It’s Real?
I m often asked to do book reviews on my blog and I rarely agree to them. This is because it takes me a long time to read a book and then if I don t enjoy it I figure the author would rather me remain silent than publish my…
The Spirit Of The Place: Samuel Shem’s New Book May Depress You
When I was in medical school I read Samuel Shem s House Of God as a right of passage. At the time I found it to be a cynical yet eerily accurate portrayal of the underbelly of academic medicine. I gained comfort from its gallows humor and it made me…
Eat To Save Your Life: Another Half-True Diet Book
I am hesitant to review diet books because they are so often a tangled mess of fact and fiction. Teasing out their truth from falsehood is about as exhausting as delousing a long-haired elementary school student. However after being approached by the authors’ PR agency with the promise of a…
