<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Carepaths &#187; admin</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.carepaths.com/author/admin/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.carepaths.com</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 02 Feb 2012 21:47:23 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=abc</generator>
		<item>
		<title>&quot;Tips on How to Contract With Private Insurers&quot; from Psychiatric News</title>
		<link>http://www.carepaths.com/tips-on-how-to-contract-with-private-insurers-from-psychiatric-news-2/</link>
		<comments>http://www.carepaths.com/tips-on-how-to-contract-with-private-insurers-from-psychiatric-news-2/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 21 Sep 2009 14:00:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Practice: Clinical and Business Issues]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Insurance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Reimbursement]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.carepaths.com/?p=268</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The excerpts below provides guidance to psychiatrists on contracting with private insurers. Most of the suggestions apply to other mental health professionals as well. However, psychiatrists are in a unique situation&#8211;the majority of psychiatrists do not contract with MCOs (psychiatrists are more apt to be fee for service than any other medical specialty) and there...]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The excerpts below provides guidance to psychiatrists on contracting with private insurers. Most of the suggestions apply to other mental health professionals as well. However, psychiatrists are in a unique situation&#8211;the majority of psychiatrists do not contract with MCOs (psychiatrists are more apt to be fee for service than any other medical specialty) and there is an undersupply of psychiatrists on many private insurers panels. This gives psychiatrists significant leverage in negotiating with MCOs.</p>
<p>Here is the excerpt:<br />
(MCOs) can affect many aspects of your practice, including how much you are paid, which services you are permitted to provide, and how you are expected to provide them. So before you sign any contract, it&#8217;s vital that you take the time to read it thoroughly.</p>
<p>Each contract is different, even from the same company.</p>
<p>Also, don&#8217;t assume that a renewal contract is the same as the one received &#8220;last year.&#8221; Often it is not.</p>
<p>Companies may include important contract features in appendixes, addendums, or &#8220;attachments&#8221; such as provider manuals, which, if you&#8217;re not careful, you may be unaware of until it&#8217;s too late.</p>
<p>You must be certain to obtain all documents referenced in a contract and to review them all before entering into a contract.</p>
<p>While some contracts may apply to only specific settings, others stipulate that an in-network psychiatrist is in-network at every place he or she provides services.</p>
<p>This requirement has been problematic for some psychiatrists who practice in clinics that accept many forms of insurance but who have private practices where no insurance is accepted.</p>
<p>If the clinic&#8217;s contract with an insurer says it covers all its psychiatrists in all practice settings, then psychiatrists who see a<br />
patient in that plan in their private practice are considered in-network providers there as well and will be paid only the in-network fees negotiated under the clinic contract.</p>
<p>Even if the clinic&#8217;s contract with the insurer does not stipulate that all places of service are covered, psychiatrists who want to be<br />
considered out of network in other settings must notify the insurer of this fact.</p>
<p>Because many insurance companies are having trouble maintaining an adequate number of psychiatrists in their networks to meet enrollees&#8217; needs, they may make it difficult for psychiatrists to sever their relationship.</p>
<p>APA&#8217;s Managed Care Help Line has received calls from members who were unable to get out of their contracts for many months because an insurer maintained it hadn&#8217;t received faxes or e-mails that the doctors had sent to convey their change in status.</p>
<p>We recommend that any notifications about a change in status with an insurer be done in writing and be sent by registered mail, return receipt requested.</p>
<p>Other Points to Remember</p>
<p>* Review the contract for any billing and balance-billing provisions<br />
that restrict your ability to bill patients.</p>
<p>* Review credentialing requirements. Personal information, such as<br />
medical history, may be unwarranted if it does not currently affect your<br />
ability to practice&#8230;.</p>
<p>* Study the confidentiality terms in the contract; federal and state<br />
laws supersede contractual requirements.</p>
<p>* Study utilization-review requirements to learn procedures for prior<br />
authorization, concurrent review, retrospective review, use of formulary<br />
restrictions, access to physician reviewers, and appeal mechanisms.<br />
These topics are frequently covered in the provider manual, which you<br />
should review before the execution of a contract.</p>
<p>* Be aware that contracts give insurers the right to conduct quality-<br />
assurance audits. This is standard and will not create any problems for<br />
you if you do appropriate documentation.</p>
<p>* Pay attention to how the insurer authorizes services in an emergency.<br />
Most companies have a utilization-management process in place that can<br />
authorize emergency services at any time, but the flexibility of the<br />
authorization process varies. Ask detailed questions about the process<br />
before signing a contract.</p>
<p>* Know when each of your current contracts expires and consider<br />
renegotiating if you feel you are not being adequately compensated. You<br />
have nothing to lose.</p>
<p>* Ask questions. Contract negotiation may be possible, especially since<br />
there is such a shortage of psychiatrists on insurance panels. Even if<br />
you cannot negotiate, be sure to ask questions on items about which you<br />
are unclear to ensure you are not entering into a contract that you<br />
can&#8217;t live with.</p>
<p>* Make sure that all representations are in writing. You should obtain<br />
any changes or clarifications to the terms of the contract in the body<br />
of the contract itself. Any additional clarifications made by<br />
representatives of the insurance company that do not agree with the<br />
contract should be incorporated in an amendment that conforms to the<br />
contractual requirements.</p>
<p>Summing It Up</p>
<p>We can&#8217;t emphasize it too much: Don&#8217;t sign any contract until you&#8217;re sure you thoroughly understand what you&#8217;re agreeing to.</p>
<p>Also, always check with your malpractice carrier to make sure nothing in the contract conflicts with your policy. And always check with your lawyer.</p>
<p>The AMA has created a detailed model managed care contract, with annotations that explain the reasons for including its various components.</p>
<p>In an ideal world, this is the kind of contract you&#8217;d be presented with when you join an insurance network.</p>
<p>The model contract is posted at .</p>
<p>A more in-depth discussion of contracting, which includes definitions of the terms you may encounter in a contract, is posted at<br />
.</p>
<p>If you have other questions about contracting, call APA&#8217;s Managed Care Help Line at (800) 343-4671.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.carepaths.com/tips-on-how-to-contract-with-private-insurers-from-psychiatric-news-2/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>AMA calls Claims System a &quot;Murky Mess&quot;</title>
		<link>http://www.carepaths.com/ama-calls-claims-system-a-murky-mess-2/</link>
		<comments>http://www.carepaths.com/ama-calls-claims-system-a-murky-mess-2/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 Jul 2009 09:34:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Practice: Clinical and Business Issues]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Insurance]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.carepaths.com/?p=254</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Miss Maureen here.  This is a report from the AMA on the state of insurance reimbursement in the US. It is useful to reflect on the fact that 33% of the healthcare dollar in the USA goes to administrative costs while in Canada it is 1%.  HIPAA was supposed to streamline billing, yet post HIPAA...]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div><em>Miss Maureen here.  This is a report from the AMA on the state of insurance reimbursement in the US. It is useful to reflect on the fact that 33% of the healthcare dollar in the USA goes to administrative costs while in Canada it is 1%.  HIPAA was supposed to streamline billing, yet post HIPAA payers continue to use a different set of rules, processes, etc.   Why? It benefits insurance companies in that all the confusion makes it more likely that claims will not get paid. In the industry it is called the &#8220;shoe box effect.&#8221;</em></div>
<div><em>Cheryl Clark, for HealthLeaders Media</em>, July 22, 2009</div>
<div>In hopes that it may lead to reduced payment hassles and could save doctors time and money, the American Medical Association yesterday scored seven large health plans plus Medicare in their promptness and accuracy for paying claims.</div>
<div>The <a href="http://www.ama-assn.org/ama/pub/physician-resources/solutions-managing-your-practice/coding-billing-insurance/heal-claims-process/national-health-insurer-report-card.shtml" target="_blank">survey found a wide variation</a> in practices among the<strong> payers, with each using a different set of rules, different timelines, and confusing and inconsistent processes.<br />
</strong></div>
<div>The doctors group also listed numerous recommendations for improving the system that would &#8220;professionalize transactions, modernize procedures and clarify what is now a real murky mess,&#8221; said William Dolan, MD, a member of the AMA board of trustees as he released the survey&#8217;s results.</div>
<div>&#8220;Physicians are now bogged down in paperwork,&#8221; which requires they divert as much as 14% of their gross revenue to assure accurate payments, Dolan said in a Webcast to release the new survey. Ideally, he added, the AMA wants to reduce physician expenditures on such processes to only 1% of their revenue.</div>
<div>&#8220;This would reduce angst, and let me tell you there&#8217;s a lot of it in the healthcare industry, and return the focus to patient care,&#8221; Dolan said.</div>
<div>Currently, doctors spend a total of three weeks a year, sometimes as much as 35 minutes a day, muddling through, trying to figure out what codes to use and what insurance plans will cover, at a cost of $200 billion a year, he said.</div>
<div>This release of the AMA scorecard is the group&#8217;s second in a campaign that began last year to put pressure on health plans and Medicare to streamline and standardize their divergent systems into one.</div>
<div>In the report, the AMA compared Aetna, Anthem Blue Cross Blue Shield, Cigna, Coventry, Health Net, Humana, UnitedHealthcare, and Medicare in 18 measures from various points in 2008 and 2009.</div>
<div>Ideally, the AMA wants all claims processes to be simplified so that physicians don&#8217;t have to work through a confusing array of procedures and rules that take time away from their patients. It also would make it easier for physicians to avoid mistakes when they request reimbursement for care.</div>
<div>&#8220;In simplest terms, this campaign would eliminate waste by getting things right the first time,&#8221; said Dolan, an orthopedic surgeon at the University of Rochester.</div>
<div>Some portion of the solution, the doctors&#8217; group said, is mentioned in the so-called <a href="http://www.healthleadersmedia.com/search_redirect.cfm?content_id=235946" target="_blank">Tri-Committee health reform proposal</a> emerging in the House. They hope it will be carried forward in any reconciled legislation that emerges.</div>
<p><strong><br />
Most health plans showed improvement</strong><br />
For physicians, one of the most vexing parts of the claims process is how well insurance plans and Medicare pay the rates as stated in their negotiated contracts. Five of seven health plans significantly improved on this score over 2008 by between 11 and 17 points.</p>
<div>For example, Cigna improved in this category from 66% to 83% while Humana improved from 84% to 93%. Coventry, however, went from 86.7% to 71.9% and HealthNet did not disclose the information. Medicare payments were the most closely aligned, with about 97.5% accuracy.</div>
<div>Another issue is the wide variation in how health payers deny claims.</div>
<div>&#8220;The inconsistency found among health insurers in 2008 continues to be demonstrated in 2009,&#8221; the AMA said in a statement. &#8220;The wide variation in how often health insurers deny claims, and the reasons used to explain the denials, indicates a serious lack of standardization in the health insurance industry.&#8221;</div>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.carepaths.com/ama-calls-claims-system-a-murky-mess-2/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

