Stanley Feld M.D., FACP, MACE Menu

Results found: 99

Permalink:

President Obama Tries To Shut Up Media

Stanley Feld M.D.,FACP,MACE

On April 16th President Obama tried to shut up the media’s criticism of Obamacare with his announcement that 8 million people have enrolled in Obamacare. The administrations had reached its goal. Obamacare is a success

Mr. Obama pointed to the number to declare the law a success and that Republicans should stop trying to overturn it.

"The point is, the repeal debate is and should be over," the president said. "The Affordable Care Act is working and I know the American people don't want us spending the next 2½ years refighting the settled political battles of the last five years."

One month earlier we heard from the same administration that the 6.6 million people who had lost their healthcare insurance because of Obamacare was an insignificant sliver of the population.

President Obama’s announcement contained few new details about enrollment. 

The entire point of Obamacare was supposed to be to insure people who were uninsured previously.

It turns out (from insurance company data) that as many as 80% of the 8 million enrollees were replacing extremely expensive healthcare insurance policies with Obamacare healthcare policies.

Individual healthcare insurance for older people with a pre-existing disease is unobtainable or extremely expensive.

These people were in the individual healthcare market only. Many had pre-existing diseases and chronic diseases.

Their risk is much higher than low risk patients. Many of these people received government subsidies because they made less than $50,000 dollars a year.

The administration has still not published the number of people who did not have insurance before Obamacare went into effect and have signed up and paid their premium.

President Obama claims he does not know that number. If the healthcare insurance companies know the exact number the Obama administration has to know that number.

President Obama’s declaration of success is ludicrous.

Patients who enrolled and paid their premium are going to realize the negative impact it will have on their medical care shortly.

There is no class of American professionals who will be more negatively impacted by Obamacare than physicians.

Obamacare reinforces the worst features of third-party payment arrangements for payment of medical care. The third party payment system of healthcare insurance has already compromised the independence and integrity of the medical profession.

With Obamacare physicians will be subject to more government regulation and oversight, and will be increasingly dependent on unreliable government reimbursement for medical services. “

These are some of the difficulties physicians will face with Obamacare.

 The Medicare Payment Formula is flawed. Physicians continue to face the threat of deep payment cuts under Medicare’s sustainable growth rate (SGR) formula.

The SGR governs the annual growth of Medicare physician payments. Congress has kicked the can down the road since 2003. Physicians have incurred a potential reduction of 30% from the present payments if congress does not provide a permanent fix.

Medicaid will be expanded in states that agree to do so to cover any individual earning up to 138 percent of the federal poverty level—$15,856 for an individual in 2013. Many states have refused to expand Medicaid.

The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) projects that this expansion will add 12 million individuals to Medicaid by 2015.

The physician reimbursement rates for Medicaid patients is 58% lower than the reimbursement physicians receive in the private sector.

 Thirty three percent of physicians do not participate in Medicaid. Patients’ access to physicians is decreased. The result is Emergency room overcrowding. ER overcrowding was the very thing the President Obama’s healthcare policy wizards wanted to decrease.

Obamacare is imposing more bureaucracy, rules, regulations, and restrictions on physicians.

Since 2010, with few exceptions, the law prohibited physicians from referring Medicare patients to hospitals in which they have ownership.

  1. Thus, a whole class of physician-owned, specialty hospitals has been removed from competition, even though they enjoyed an undisputed record of providing high-quality patient care.
  2. This regulation has driven a large number of physicians to stop accepting Medicare even thought their service is of high quality and less expensive than hospital systems.
  3. There have been mountains of new regulations that are impossible to keep up with. These regulations have driven physicians away from accepting Medicare reimbursement.
  4. Obamacare has created multiple federal agencies, boards and commissions to regulate the practice of medicine.
  5. These creations are partly the fault of physician groups not effectively regulating their peers.

               a. Obamacare created a “nonprofit” Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute.  The institute will determine clinical effectiveness of medical treatments, procedures, drugs, and medical devices.

The result will be an administrative implementation nightmare. All medicine is local. Only financial incentive can work. Penalties and regulatory requirements will not work. It will simply generate an atmosphere of mistrust and non-cooperation.

The Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute could be a teaching tool for physicians and patients.

However, the likelihood of the government dictating cookbook care guidelines and regulations, and interfering with physicians’ clinical judgment and the further destruction of the patient-physician relationship is high. The Institute will also retard clinical innovation in the delivery of care.

              b. President Obama’s Independent Payment Advisory Board (IPAB) is comprised of 15 unelected bureaucrats. It will be composed of non-practicing physicians, lawyer, laypersons and government bureaucrat.

The goal is to reduce the growth rate of Medicare spending and non-federal spending through health insurance exchanges.

 “IPAB’s recommendations would go into effect unless Congress enacts an alternative proposal of equivalent savings.”

The chance of congress presenting an alternative equivalent saving is small. President Obama has stated in the past that the IPAB has little power except to make recommendations. This is not true!

Former Vermont Democratic Governor Howard Dean (D) has said, 

"IPABs are essentially a health-care rationing body. By setting doctor reimbursement rates for Medicare and determining which procedures and drugs will be covered and at what price, the IPAB will be able to stop certain treatments its members do not favor by simply setting rates to levels where no doctor or hospital will perform them."

This is the only thing that Dr. Dean has ever said that I have ever been able to agree with.

The IPAB will control spending through reimbursement cuts. It can enable limited or no payment for selected services and medical procedures or for Medicare physician payment.

It looks as if it could drive physicians out of practice and hospital out of business. This is especially true in the absence of tort reform.

              c. Pay-for-performance programs are another terrible idea. Physicians can only control some of the outcomes. Patients’ compliance/adherence is the key to most outcomes.

Payment will be adjusted to reflect performance. The measurement will be based on data from the Physician Quality Reporting System and cost data from Medicare fee-for-service claims.

I have previously demonstrated the ineffectiveness of using claims data to make outcomes decisions.

These programs can be used to create powerful economic incentive by complying with standardized guidelines at the expense of individual patient care.

All you have to do is “check the box” to achieve a high and financially beneficial score as a condition of participating in the government’s health programs.

It is aa attempt created by bureaucrats that will not work in the real world.

Most physicians hate Obamacare. Forty-three percent of physicians are considering retiring in the face of the need for an additional 91,500 physicians by 2020.

“Obamacare neglects physicians’ most pressing concerns, such as tort reform, and significantly worsens the already painful problems that come with third-party payment and government red tape.”

Obamacare misses all the keys necessary for Repairing the Healthcare System. Obamacare steers out of the skid (wrong direction). It makes things worse.

Consumers must drive the healthcare system. The physician/patient relationship must be restored. Physicians must help patients make treatment decisions not government, insurance executives and other bureaucrats.

Repairing the Healthcare System will not be achieved until patients, not the government, control their health care dollars and decisions at the advice of their physicians in a viable physician patient relationship.

My Ideal Medial Savings accounts steer into the skid and repairs the healthcare system.

The Obamacare debate is hardly over as President Obama has declared.

 

The opinions expressed in the blog “Repairing The Healthcare System” are, mine and mine alone

Please have a friend subscribe  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Permalink:

What Are Private Insurance Exchanges?

Stanley Feld M.D.,FACP,MACE

Corporations have been providing healthcare insurance
since after WWII. The cost of healthcare insurance has been rising since.

The increase in premiums became intolerable in the
1980’s when cost shifting occurred. Medicare decreased reimbursement and the
fees were shifted to private insurance.  Several experiments in healthcare coverage
were tried to reduce the cost to employers. All the schemes failed to control
costs.

The schemes include managed care and HMO’s. All the
insurance schemes were defined benefit plans. Employees were immune from
responsibility for themselves or their healthcare dollars.

As the costs have risen to unsustainable levels
corporations have been trying to figure out how to get out of providing
healthcare coverage for their employees as a benefit.

Most employers, large and small, want to limit their
exposure to healthcare premiums and Obamacare penalties.

A movement to limit employment to less than 30 hours
a week to avoid providing healthcare insurance to employees and avoid Obamacare
penalties has become viral.

No one has tackled the real reasons for the rising
healthcare costs. No one has tackled the perverse incentives and advantages
given to the healthcare insurance industry all these years.

I have argued that this perverse incentive can lead
to all the other perverse incentives initiated by the rest of the stakeholders
in the healthcare system in order to survive.

Once more the healthcare insurance industry figured
out how to increase their profits while making it appear they are helping both employers
and employees.

It must be remembered that the healthcare insurance
industry profits through both private insurance and government provided
healthcare coverage.

The industry makes its profits by providing
administrative services. The government outsources the administrative services
to the healthcare insurance industry.

The profit generated in both the private sector and
the government sector is far from transparent.

The healthcare industry’s new scheme converts defined
benefit coverage to defined contribution coverage for healthcare benefits.

In recent months we have seen large corporations
switch their employee healthcare benefits to defined contribution programs.

A partial list of companies includes Walgreens, Home
Depot, Sears, Trader Joes, Xerox and IBM retirees.

Rather than provide a healthcare insurance coverage
benefit through the corporation, the corporation is providing employees with a
defined contribution each year. The employees can then buy their insurance
through their employer’s contracted Private Health Insurance Exchange.

The Private Health Insurance Exchanges are provided
to the corporations by the healthcare insurance industry. There will be a menu
of insurance plans and premium levels employees eligible for coverage can
choose from.

The principals of healthcare coverage include all of
the basic requirements of Obamacare’s Health Insurance Exchanges. Employees
having a preexisting illness must be accepted. However, premiums might be
higher for patients with pre-existing conditions.

The defined contribution amount has not been defined.
It could be a couple of hundred dollars a year to a couple of thousand dollars
a year. In any event it does not sound as if it will be enough to cover the
cost of the healthcare insurance premium.

There will be high deductible plans with patients not
covered for the deductibles and co-pays.

If an employee doesn’t like what he buy in the
companies Private Insurance Exchange, he can always sign up for Obamacare’s
Health Insurance Exchange.

It sounds great for the employer because the employer
can predict costs. It is wonderful for the healthcare insurance industry.

It sounds terrible for the consumer.

It sounds both good and bad for the government. It
depends on how one looks at it.

The Obama administration will have more people sign
up for Obamacare’s Health Insurance Exchanges. The result will be greater
control over the healthcare system. I believe this is the reason the Obama administration has not opposed the Private Health Insurance Exchanges.

However, the consumers signing up for Obamacare Health Insurance Exchanges will be the sickest
consumers. These consumers will use the system more than average.

This will result in an increase in the deficit and
unsustainability of Obamacare. The only way out is to increase premiums and
taxes.

This is called a “redistribution of wealth” because
people making up to $40,000 per year do not pay taxes. If the tax increases are
means tested it will increase the amount of wealth that is redistributed will
increase.

The increase in taxes will decrease economic growth.

At the present time Obamacare’s Healthcare insurance
Exchanges do not have verification software. The system is vulnerable to fraud
and abuse even if it could work.

America is just becoming aware of the fraud and abuse
in the food stamp entitlement program. The food stamp entitlement has double. The
government has not fixed the food stamp program.

It is likely the same thing will happen with the government
run Health Insurance Exchanges. It will drive the federal deficit even higher.

Even though the Private Health Exchanges shift financial
responsibility to the consumer to pay for their own insurance it does not provide
financial incentive for patients to become responsible for their health.

It does not contain educational programs to help
patients deal with their chronic diseases. It does not teach consumers to be
responsible for their health and healthcare dollars.

Obamacare does not provide these incentives either.

The only plan that does is my Ideal Medical Saving
Accounts with employers providing support while shifting responsibility to
consumers by providing incentives for patients to lower the cost of their care.

The opinions expressed in the blog “Repairing The Healthcare System” are, mine and mine alone

Please have a friend subscribe

 

 

Permalink:

President Obama – Do Something That Could Work!

Stanley Feld M.D.,FACP,MACE

The solution to repairing the healthcare system is simple. The
healthcare system must be consumer driven. If consumers were in control of their
healthcare dollars and were responsible for their health and their healthcare
choices the cost of the healthcare system would decrease to manageable levels.

My ideal Medical Savings Account puts the consumer in charge. Its
success is totally dependent on real transparency by all stakeholders including
healthcare insurance companies, hospital systems and physicians. 

A Health Savings Account does not give consumers enough of an
incentive
to shop for price and quality with the present lack of transparency.
In a transparent healthcare system Medical Saving Accounts would provide more
incentive than Health Savings Accounts.  

Presently President Obama is trying to eliminate Health Savings
Accounts. HSAs are the single greatest threat to his goal for a single party
payer system. They are also the fastest growing healthcare insurance product.

The lack of transparency for hospitals, healthcare insurance
companies, drug companies and physicians must be eliminated. The public must
demand that the healthcare insurance industry make their expenses transparent
so that its exorbitant salaries and profits can be clearly understood.   

There is no reason that this one stakeholder receives 40% of
every premium dollar
spent either by private corporations or the government.
The medical loss ratio as it is presently constructed by the Obama
administration provides 20% for expenses. The other 20% of the $40% is in the
direct patient care column.

The government should help consumers understand these prices and
understand the measurement of quality. Consumers of healthcare must be turned
into Prosumers of healthcare (Productive Consumers.)

When this happens the consumers can become independent
intelligent consumers. Consumers will become independent of government and its
bureaucracy.

The Obama administration wants consumers to be more dependent on
government not less dependent.

Intelligent independent Consumers will force the other
stakeholders to be competitive. Competition will drive healthcare costs down.

Government cost controls will not drive prices down. They will
simply distort prices and cause more spending.

Private sources such as Angie’s list help consumers decide on
which plumber to hire. It is important and creates competition and price
lowering. However the defect in Angie’s list is that it is based on other
consumers’ opinions.

It is not based on specific costs or origins of the cost to the
plumber or the measurement of the plumber’s skill. It only deals with price and
consumer satisfaction. Angie’s list does make plumbers competitive.

Competition for consumers will bring down the cost of healthcare.
 By forcing consolidation of doctors and
hospitals Obamacare will decrease competition and increase prices.

 Healthcare
policy wonks dismiss this concept because they believe consumers are not smart
enough or interested enough in learning to be intelligent healthcare consumers.
They are wrong.

Their thnking is correct if a system exists where consumers are
spending other people’s money. Obamacare is such a system. It will drive costs
up just as the private first dollar coverage system has driven healthcare
prices up.

There is no financial incentive for healthcare consumers to try
to save money and preserve their health.

Obamacare is a huge entitlement with an overwhelming budget that
will be impossible to execute. We have seen that to be true with ever increasing
waivers and the most recent delay in the mandate until 2015.  There will be delays in other critical
portions of Obamacare in the near future. It could be delayed forever because
it cannot be executed.

In my last blog I forgot to mention the delay in forming and
activating the Independent Physician Advisory Board.

Last year I wrote about the Obama administration’s infatuation
with the Canadian Healthcare System. I reviewed the 2011 Fraser report
explaining that the Canadian Healthcare System is unsustainable.


I also wrote about Canadian consumers’ healthcare experiences in
two provinces I visited.  The fact is the
system doesn’t work well and is unsustainable.

The Fraser Institute in a
2011 report concluded that Canada’s health care
system is spending money at an unsustainable rate
. Six of ten Canadian
provinces are on track to spend half of their revenues on health care,
according to the institute.

“In 2011, health care
spending consumed 50 percent of revenues in Canada’s two largest provinces,
Ontario and Quebec.

By 2017, four more
provinces — Saskatchewan, Alberta, British Columbia and New Brunswick — will
spend half of their revenues on health care, according to the institute.

Total federal, provincial
and territorial government health spending has grown by 8.1 percent annually.
Canada’s GDP increased by 6.7 percent during the same period. The math is
obvious. The Canadian healthcare entitlement system is not working.

“In response to the rapidly
rising costs, provincial governments have raised taxes and rationed care,
increasing patient wait times. Provincial drug plans have also more often refused
to pay for most of the drugs that are certified as “safe and effective” by
Health Canada.

“Unsustainable rates of
growth in health care spending crowd out the resources available for other
purposes including education, public safety, and economic growth-enhancing tax
relief,” Fraser Institute Senior Fellow Nadeem Esmail told The Daily Caller
News Foundation in an email.”

Only 20% of the people utilize the healthcare system at any on
time. If consumers know they are entitled to healthcare and the healthcare
system will fix them if they get sick, consumers of healthcare feel protected. The
feelings of eighty percent of consumers who are not sick believe the system is
great until they have to interact with the system. In this system of
entitlement consumers have a tendency to not take care of their health.  This makes them more likely to interact with
the system in the future when they are very sick. The result is increasing
healthcare costs.

Once an entitlement is created it is almost impossible to
eliminate it even though it has proved ineffective and costly.

England’s NHS has shown this to be true. The NHS is struggling
right now to modify the NHS so it works
better for physicians and patients.
However, the new reform rules have been contaminated with so many amendments
that I suspect no progress will be made
.

Consumers are realizing that Obamacare is much too complicated
and impossible to execute. Rather than demanding repeal and eliminating the
concept of instituting an entitlement program, the New York Times is publishing
letters from readers that are demanding a single party payer system to simplify
the system.

Let us stop making the same mistakes over and over again.

 The opinions expressed in the blog “Repairing The Healthcare System” are, mine and mine alone

Please have a friend subscribe

 

 

 

 

 

Permalink:

Obama Administration Continuously Declines To Renew Indiana’s Medicaid Waiver

 Stanley Feld M.D.,FACP,MACE

In light of the recent alleged IRS
scandel targeting certain groups, I am reminded of the Medicaid incident in
Indiana. I believe the incident is resolved now with the Obama administration
granting a waiver to Indiana after two years of bureaucratic haggling.

In 2007 Governor Mitch Daniels (R.) was
successful in getting the Indiana state legislature to pass a Medicaid reform
plan called the Healthy Indiana Plan. It is an expansion of Medicaid. It uses a consumer-driven
health plan to encourage low-income beneficiaries to take control of their
health and healthcare dollars.

This healthcare plan is a variant of my
ideal medical saving account.

 The Healthy Indiana Plan has been very successful.

Healthy Indiana Plan has been the most
innovative and successful reform of Medicaid in the history of the Medicaid
program.

The federal government’s waiver for the
plan was given in 2007 and set to expire on December 31, 2012. Indiana applied
for an extension of the Medicaid wavier in early 2011. In November 2011 the
Obama Administration rejected the state’s request to extend its federal waiver.

Over 45,000 poor Hoosiers on Medicaid
were scheduled to lose this innovative Medicaid coverage in 2013.

Medicaid is theoretically run by the
states in cooperation with the federal government.  In reality, any time a state wants to make
the tiniest changes in its
Medicaid program, it has to go hat-in-hand to the U.S. Department of Health and
Human Services with a formal request for a waiver and these waivers are usually
denied.

 This federal control has been part of the
disagreement states have with the federal government over health insurance
exchanges. The central government wants to shift the financial burden on the
states while controlling the states’ decisions.

Indiana succeeded in gaining a waiver in 2007
because it was seeking to expand Medicaid to
a group of people who weren’t then eligible for the program and because the
state’s effort required no additional outlays from the federal government.  Governor
Mitch Daniels paid for the
Medicaid expansion by increasing the state’s cigarette tax by 44 cents. It made
sense to everyone except the people that smoked. 

Patients had skin in the game because
they had to pay 2 -5% of their income for their insurance coverage. The plan
provided financial as well as wellness incentives.

We did a lot of reading on
criticism of health savings accounts,” says Seema Verma, who was the
architect of the Indiana
program. “One of the criticisms was that people didn’t have enough money to pay
for preventive care. So we took preventive care out, made that first-dollar
coverage.

“ Also, people said that people didn’t have enough for the
deductible, so we fully funded it. Then, you have to make your contribution
every month, with a 60-day grace period. If you don’t make the contribution,
you’re out of the program for 12 months. It’s a strong personal responsibility
mechanism.”

 I described the Healthy Indiana plan in
detail in January 2008 pre President Obama
.

Medicaid patients get a specified amount
of preventive care for free.  Included
are free annual physical exams, pap smears and mammograms for women,
cholesterol tests, flu shots, blood glucose screenings, and tetanus-diphtheria
screenings.

Medicaid beneficiaries have no
cost-sharing requirements (co-pays, deductibles, etc.) except for non-urgent
use of emergency rooms.

The money remaining in the Medicaid
patients’ POWER accounts at the end of the year can be applied to the following
year’s contribution only if they obtain the required free preventive disease
services.

“The program has been, by many measures, a smashing success. “What
we’re finding out is that, first of all, low-income people are just as capable
as anybody else of making wise decisions when it’s their own money that they’re
spending,” Mitch Daniels explains in a Heritage Foundation video.”

“And they’re also acting more like good consumers. They’re
visiting emergency rooms less, they’re using more generic drugs, they’re asking
for second opinions. And some real money is starting to accumulate in their
[health savings] accounts.”

The program has been
very popular. Ninety (90) percent of enrollees are
making their required monthly contributions. Employers didn’t dump their
workers onto the program, crowding others out, because you needed to be
uninsured for six months in order to be eligible for it.

 “The program’s level of
satisfaction is at an unheard-of 98 percent approval rating,” Verma told 
Kenneth Artz.

Lower income families are not too stupid
to be wise healthcare consumers despite popular belief.

2010 study by
Mathematica Policy Research found that in the program

71 percent met the preventive care
requirement and were able to roll the balances over to the following year.  Only 39% obtained preventive care in the
first six months. It proves financial incentives work.

The lack of physician access is the
biggest reason why health outcomes for Medicaid patients lag far behind those
of individuals with private insurance.

Healthy Indiana pays better than
traditional Medicaid. The physician access trend has been reversed. Preventive
care participation rates are higher than the
privately-insured population.

Why would the Obama administration, which
controls the states’ Medicaid programs, refuse to grant a waiver for Indiana’s successful
program?

The first excuse HHS used was “ HSS  hadn’t written the regulations for Obamacare
yet.”

According to Seema Verma  “the state will now have to file a much more
complex “State Plan Amendment” that may not get approved before the Healthy
Indiana program is set to expire.”

Before his term expired Gov. Daniels
had written to HHS Secretary
Kathleen Sebelius asking her for permission to use the Healthy Indiana Plan to
handle Obamacare’s mandatory expansion of Medicaid. He had not heard back.

The Obama Administration claims to be on
the side of the poor.  Why would it not
approve a waiver of a popular program for the poor that provides the poor with
superior health care?

Whatever the reason, tens of thousands of people will be
needlessly harmed.

Regulatory
burdens and “poison pills” have been thrown at the Indiana health plan. One
such poison pill is not allowing the state to include the $1100 Power account given to Medicaid patients to make
wise medical care choices.

Yet
the government pays the healthcare insurance industry for help desks and rent
for buildings where there are help desks as direct patient care instead of
expenses.

It is
not only bewildering, it is obscene.

The
controversy continued throughout 2012 past the expiration date of the 2007
waiver into 2013.

Mike
Pence, the new governor, kept fighting off bureaucratic rules but got nowhere
through March of 2013.

The subtext of all of this is the
Obama administration wants a top down centrally controlled Medicaid system with
the financial burden on the states and Indiana wants to control its own destiny
with its successful plan.

Stuff
like the following has been going on. Diane Gerrits, CMS' director of state
demonstrations and waivers, wrote in a Feb. 25 letter that the state will have
to resubmit its application because it had not yet held two public hearings
required by law.

CMS said as a result of the failure to comply with the transparency portion of
the proposal, the state must begin a 30-day state public comment and notice
period. The state must follow with an additional 30-day federal public comment.

This
has been going on since 2011

Governor
Mike Pence fired back,

 "The Feb. 25, 2013, letter from HHS does not
indicate in any way that the waiver application process has been
jeopardized," he wrote Thursday. "It does, however, speak to the
flawed bureaucratic process that has impeded progress on our successful Healthy
Indiana Plan."

The
Obama administration is trying to destroy all health savings accounts both
public and private. This is probably the reason for these artificial delays.

Suddenly,
in mid April, under public pressure and possibly the impending IRS scandal Indiana’s
waiver request was approved.

This
is a happy ending to the Indiana saga and perhaps a model to get all the
Medicaid programs out of the deep ditch they are in.

The opinions expressed in the blog “Repairing The Healthcare System” are, mine and mine alone

Please have a friend subscribe

 

 

 

 

 

Permalink:

The Future State Business Model For Repairing the Healthcare System

Stanley Feld M.D.,FACP,MACE

Obamacare is going to lead to the demise of both the healthcare system and the medical care system in the United States. America is at a critical turn in 2012.  The evidence for the collapse is presented in the following links.

The business model for a successful repair of both the healthcre system and the medical care system are outline on the next slide.


Slide14

A consumer driven healthcare system is critcal to a successful repair of the healthcare system. Read this link to understand the full meaning and implications of a consumer driven healthcare system.

Consumers must drive the systems by being responsible for their own healthcare decisions and own their healthcare dollars even if they are subsidized by the government.

Another critcal element in business model for the future state is effective tort reform. Ideally defensive medical testing  has to be eliminated completely. Defensive medical costs the healthcare system between $300-500 billion dollars a year

A summary of the misalign insentives must be understood and examine . There is a way to align all the primary and secondary stakeholders incentives. It must be agreed too that consumers are the primary stakeholders and physicians are next. Most of the control and power in the system has shifted to the secondary stakeholder namely the government, the hospital systems and mostly the healthcare insurance industry.

The government must understand that the only way to reduce cost is to shift the responsibility of controlling costs from the government to consumers.

Consumer must be the leader of their healthcare team.

Consumers must be responsible for health and healthcare dollars.

Consumers must have effective financial incentives to become medically responsible to themselves. It is clear with the incidence of obesity, the increases in smoking and drug addictions, hearth attacks, and strokes from high blood pressure that the need to attain good health is not enough incentive.

My ideal Medical Saving Accounts are an excellent way of providing financial incentives to achieve good health in a consumer driven system. The achievement of good health will drive down the costs to the healthcare system. The incidence of costly complications of disease will be reduced.

My ideal Electronic Medical Record is an important innovation. It is inexpensive to physicians. The data belongs to patients and their physicians and set up in a way that it is not punitive to physicians. It should be a fully functional EMR.

All physicians know that medical care decisions making and judging the quality of medical care by electronic data is faulty. All the EMR's are expensive. They also put physicians in a vulnerable position to be judged by faulty data. My Ideal EMR helps physicians track their patients and improve their medical communications and care. 

It is important that consumer become responsible for their own Personal Medical Record. The ideal EMR permits patients to download their records with their tests to their own computer or flash drive. Consumers should carry their medical records at all times in case of emergency. 

Social Networking is the key to a consumer driven healthcare system. The possibilities are compelling.

Improved communication between patients and physicians will be driven by a consumer driven healthcare system connected to social networking. The motivations is financial when consumers own their healthcare dollars.

Education via the Internet must be an extension of physician care.

Government's Educational Responsibility:

Teach consumers to become intelligent healthcare consumers

Government must develop a program to effectively combat obesity. There must be a change in the food industry and farm policy.

Price Transparency

Price Controls Do Not Work.

Eliminate Medical Monopolies

Patient must learn to be and educated and responsible healthcare consumer.

There must be a decrease in medical entitlement programs. Consumers must have skin in the game in order to be educated and responsible consumers. Consumers need to be a financial risk.

This is the outline of the future state business model. The readers should click on each link to read the details of each bullet point.

This business model will enable America to have an affordable healthcare system for all which will become sustainable.

The opinions expressed in the blog “Repairing The Healthcare System” are, mine and mine alone

Please have a friend subscribe

Permalink:

Here Comes The Defective Judge (CMS)!

Stanley Feld M.D., FACP, MACE

President Obama’s goal is to have the government be the single party payer for the entire healthcare system.

There is no doubt in my mind that the government as the single party payer will not work for patients or physicians.

President Obama cannot control CMS’s misuse of it assignments because bureaucratic complexity. One area of abuse and misuse of the department’s power is its attempt to eliminate fraud and abuse in Medicare and Medicaid.

There is no question that some healthcare providers abuse the Medicare and Medicaid payment system.

No one ever asks the critical question. Should the payment system used in Medicare and Medicaid be changed to prevent fraud and abuse?

Never the less President Obama is expanding the old punitive system. He thinks he is going to stop abuse with his expansion.  

“ Stepping up their game against health care fraud, the Obama administration and major insurers announced Thursday they will share raw data to try to shut off billions of dollars in questionable payments.”

I don’t know how many times I have shown that claims data to determine quality of care or fraud and abuse is defective.

"Fraud is estimated by the administration to cost Medicare about $60 billion a year, and the Obama administration has beefed up the government's efforts to stop it, bringing in record settlements with drug companies for marketing violations as well as using new powers in the health care law to pursue low-level fraudsters with greater zeal."

 

This is a small amount compared to the $2.5 trillion dollar healthcare system cost when one considers the government’s investigative costs and the hardship these errors impose on many innocent physicians and patients investigated.

The hardships are enough to destroy physicians’ trust in the government and their desire to deal with the government.

It also serves to destroy the physician patient relationship.

Physician patient relationships are essential to the therapeutic success of a treatment regime.

Physicians have complained about this bureaucratic abuse to their congressmen. Congress has looked into this abuse. CMS’s approach has been to criminalize physicians using questionable data and decisions by unqualified judges.

Chairman Charlie Gonzalez of the House Small Business Committee outlines the problems brought to his attention several years ago. His hearings did not receive much attention.

Opening statement by Chairman Charlie Gonzalez

  

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0SmKmLMPu-s&feature=relmfu

 

Dr. Karen Smith a former President of the North Carolina chapter the American Association of Family Practitioners describes her encounter with CMS’s subcontractor for investigating fraud and abuse.   CMS’s assignment is to discover Medicare and Medicaid underpayment or overpayment as well as fraud and abuse.

 

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3v4Sq7oDCgo&feature=player_embedded

 

 I believe it is important for anyone who is interested in what is happening to the healthcare system to view the several You Tubes I am including in this blog. 

Dr. Michael Schweitz, Vice President of The Coalition of State Rheumatology Organizations in West Palm Beach, FL discusses the defects in the RAC system and the need to change.

  

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E5K8iPqsmjY&feature=relmfu

Dr. Schweitz states that administrative costs in dealing with the government is overwhelming to physician practices. The stress imposed on physicians detracts from their ability to deliver quality medical care to their patients.

Most important is the government’s attitude toward the physicians and their practices. The physicians are guilty until they prove themselves innocent.  Government’s subcontractors use claims data to prove the physicians guilt

Another problem is the more the outsourced company collects from physicians, the larger the commission it collects from CMS.

Mr. Timothy B. Hill is Chief Financial Officer, Director of the Office of Financial Management, Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. He answers questions from Chairman Charlie Gonzalez

  

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FBpXubSY8O8&feature=relmfu

 

 The questions continue to Mr. Hill. He says CMS recognizes its abuse of physicians. He hopes to improve.

Since Obamacare has expanded physicians’ complaints have increased.

 

 

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&feature=endscreen&v=uRX1M31T8LA

 

  

 

Can anyone believe this testimony given by Mr. Hill? I hope his message is not believed by congress. Mr. Hill does not document his department policy changes

 “ This week White House officials said a "trusted third party" would comb through data from Medicare, Medicaid and private health plans and turn questionable billing over to insurers or government investigators. That third party organization has yet to be selected.”

 

With the impending a thirty percent reduction in Medicare payments on January 1, 2013 physicians will not be able to afford care for Medicare and Medicaid patients.  

Mr. Joseph A. Schraad, MHA Chief Executive Officer Oklahoma Allergy and Asthma Clinic, in Oklahoma City, describes the challenges that the practice he manages face. Less and less providers are going to accept Medicare.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cINHOZmo_wA&feature=relmfu

 Dr. Forrest in his direct care payment model for patients describes the formula he uses to avoid the government’s interference with his practice of medicine. He talk is riveting.

  

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dUX4P7XfY8o

Other formulas can be used. The You Tubes presented here demonstrate that the Judge (CMS) is using the wrong formula. The CMS cannot control their outsourced venders who have inappropriate incentives.

The are driving physician away from accepting Medicare and Medicaid payments.  In the process patients lose

The way to solve fraud and abuse is to have patients police the healthcare system. Patients can uncover fraud and abuse if they own their healthcare dollar and have financial incentives to save unspent money in a retirement fund.

Education and financial incentives will make consumers productive consumers.

The way to approach physicians is not to assume they are criminals and subject them to the stress and expense to defend them in a defective evaluation system.

Physicians must be educated on how to improve coding efficiency and the government’s system of measurement must be made more accurate and less complex. ICD 10 is a big mistake. It makes coding complicated.

The best formula, in my opinion, is to empower and educate patients.

Government and employers must provide patients with financial incentives to become educated buyers of medical care services. Patients must be given the opportunity to own their healthcare dollars and be responsible for their own health and healthcare.

My ideal medical savings account provides patients with that opportunity.

 Physicians collect only 10% of the healthcare dollars spent.

The real question is who collects the remainder of the 2.5 trillion dollars spent?

America should not depend on increased bureaucracy and bureaucratic staff to administer medical care with increased and confusing rules.

Everyone knows this will only result in increased inefficiency and higher costs. 

The opinions expressed in the blog “Repairing The Healthcare System” are, mine and mine alone. 

 If you like this blog please send it to a friend

 

 

Permalink:

Another Big Mistake!

 

Stanley Feld M.D.,FACP,MACE

On July 1, with great fanfare, CMS announced that 89 organizations have been chosen to serve the healthcare needs of some 1.2 million Medicare beneficiaries in CMS’ Accountable Care Organizations (ACO) program.

Many of the premier integrated health systems, such as Mayo Clinic, Cleveland Clinic, Geisinger Health System, and Intermountain Healthcare had rejected an invitation to participate in the program in June 2011.

Among the reasons for rejecting the government’s offer to be a participant were the complex, contradictory and burdensome rules, the risk in shared savings, and the need for participating patients to be included in oversight boards.

Leaders of all four organizations praised the ACO concept but criticized the proposed implementation.  Geisenger Health System said “

 “It seems to be very prescriptive and restrictive with a fair amount of administrative and regulatory oversight."

 

The recent CMS press release makes it sound as if the ACO program is off to a good start.

Totally false!

There are 35 million seniors and disabled persons presently on Medicare. The program will include 1.2 million Medicare patients.

  • 1.2 million Medicare enrollees represent less than 3.4% of patients on Medicare.
  • The number of organizations enrolled does not represent validation of the acceptance of the ACO process by the medical community.
  • It does not represent validation of the contention that routing Medicare patients through ACO’s will save money. 

The growth in the cost of care’s baseline, on which an ACO organization will be measured, is not defined. The participating ACO organization cannot possibly know what the downside risk is.

It looks like CMS waived the downside risk temporarily for 84 of the 89 ACO’s who signed up. The waiver will not last forever. When it ends it will be too late for these ACO’s to get out.

CMS delayed the original start date from January 1,2012 to July 1,2012. This was an ominous sign. As far as I can tell no one has any idea how many of the groups signed up are integrated care groups.

 SUMMARIES OF ACOS SELECTED FOR JULY 1, 2012 START DATE[1]

http://www.cms.gov/apps/media/press/factsheet.asp?Counter=4405&intNumPerPage=10&checkDate=&checkKey=&srchType=1&numDays=3500&srchOpt=0&srchData=&keywordType=All&chkNewsType=6&intPage=&showAll=&pYear=&year=&desc=&cboOrder=date

I have written several articles explaining why I believe ACO’s will be a gigantic waste of government money, which will add to America’s deficit.

 “The more I study ACOs the worse they look. Dr. Berwick’s goal is redistribution of wealth. This is exactly what ACOs are going to do. Patients, taxpayers and physicians are going to get the short end of the distribution.

Hospital systems are spending a ton of money trying to form ACOs. They are going to lose big. I have concentrated on the obvious defects and difficulties in forming ACOs in the past. Here are some more traps.”

 "Dr. Don Berwick and his associates have a naïve view of the ability of organizations to form and execute Accountable Care Organizations (ACOs). ACOs fit well into President Obama’s worldview of government controlling our healthcare system."

There are three major problems:

  1. The government is broke. It does not have the money to pay for a government takeover of the healthcare system.
  2. New systems need participant cooperation to succeed.
  3. Creating a fully integrated healthcare system is difficult to nearly impossible unless the system has salaried physicians and a fully transparent hospital/physician provider organization. This will not happen soon in the current hospital and physician cultural milieu.

“President Obama and Dr. Don Berwick have overestimated the abilities of the healthcare system to respond to their hubristic assumptions.

 “The ACO program is based on the hubristic assumption that the federal government can design the best organizational structure for the delivery of care, foster its development, and control its operation for the entire country."

Physicians and hospital system will not cooperate because: 

  • Physicians and hospitals have little experience or control in managing risk.
  • Physicians and hospital systems experience with HMO’s in the 1980’s proved their inability to manage risk.
  • It was a painful financial experience for both.
  • Most physicians and hospital systems are not very interested in assuming this risk again.

 The risk of ACOs has been sugar coated by the administration.

Patients are the only stakeholders who can control their healthcare risk. All health policy wonks ignore the role of the patients in controlling and managing their healthcare risk.

 Dr. Berwick thinks hospitals and physicians will be motivated to control patients’ healthcare risk with ACOs.

He is wrong. I predicted participation would be minimal.

Physicians take on enormous risk taking care of patients presently. The risk increases when patients do not follow physicians’ treatment recommendations.

 Physicians are in no mood to take on financial responsibility and malpractice risk for actions that might fail because of patients’ non-adherence. Patients have to be motivated with health and financial incentives to comply.

Those physicians and hospital systems participating in the ACO program will lose financially and professionally.

There are several other key points for the lack of success of the ACO program

  1. " Obamacare uses Medicare reimbursement as an incentive to create accountable care organizations (ACOs), which the federal government has decided are the way to deliver quality care at lower cost.
  2. Proposed regulations by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) are largely confusing, impenetrable, and inconsistent.
  3. They give CMS detailed control over ACOs and the providers who participate in them, including censorship of ACO communications with Medicare beneficiaries.
  4. Medicare beneficiaries are assigned to ACOs without their knowledge or consent.
  5. Membership, in reality, is a retrospective bookkeeping entry relevant only to financial dealings between CMS and the ACO. ACOs may even have to pay money back to Medicare if they do not meet CMS goals for savings.
  6. The incentives offered to ACOs are diffuse and speculative, entailing intrusive regulation of ACOs and providers.
  7.  ACOs as defined by Obamacare are fatally flawed and cannot be fixed by merely changing the proposed regulations."

 This is neither a Democrat nor Republican issue. It is an issue of developing a healthcare system that will work. The cost of developing this government controlled healthcare system that is doomed to fail is enormous.

The Mayo Clinic, Cleveland Clinic, Kiesinger Health System, and Intermountain Healthcare are probably the most integrated healthcare systems existing in America. They visualized the lack of potential for success in ACO’s present structure.  

Thirty-six organizations signed up for the Pioneer Demonstrations ACO 6 months ago. The list and details can be found on the CMS fact sheet. The details of the deal they made are not easily available.

innovations.cms.gov/Files/fact…/PioneerACO-General-Fact-Sheet.pd

 

 It is worth studying all of the organizations that were selected for the Pioneer ACO program. These organization must believe they are in a no lose situations. They will find out that they will lose and it will be too late to get out.

All of the organizations represent a very small percentage of practicing physicians.  These physicians take care of a very small portion of Medicare patients.

It will take several years and much money to decide the ACO’s will fail. The only healthcare system that will align all the stakeholders’ incentives is my Ideal Medical Savings Account.

The opinions expressed in the blog “Repairing The Healthcare System” are, mine and mine alone. 

 If you like this blog please send it to a friend

 

 

 

Permalink:

How Could A Social Networking Company Make Money In Healthcare?

Stanley Feld M.D.,FACP, MACE

My last blog about individual healthcare insurance policies generated a lot of comments from young people starting up a business and individuals operating their own business at home. I also received several from entrepreneurs looking to start a business.

One person wrote,

"Dear Dr. Feld

So we have now learned that high deductible plans are what people should be purchasing. We also learned that they should be self insuring for $10,000 which is the highest deductible insurance at the lowest price.

 Over $10,000 is where are at the greatest financial risk. True insurance should cover our greatest risk.

I would like to know where is the business opportunity is for an Internet company that runs social networks?

 

 

 Sincerely

Z"

I said the world belongs to young people 20-50 years old. They also understand the power and mechanics of social networking.

If there was a social network dedicated to describing the advantages and disadvantages of the healthcare insurance options available to the unemployed, self- employed and under insured there would be many members. If those members had the ability to have input it would grow even larger with appropriate marketing.

I have not figured out how social networking sites make money except through advertising. I imagine many companies would like to get the attention of these consumers who are seeking healthcare insurance advice.

It has been reported that people change their job up to 8 times during their career. More and more people are in start-up businesses and need healthcare insurance for their employees. Many people are becoming consultants and are self-employed. They all need healthcare insurance for their family.

President Obama’s answer to the problem is the government will provide the healthcare insurance for you. Healthcare insurance is a right as an American.

There are several problems with this statement. The government cannot afford to provide adequate healthcare insurance for the entire population.

Britain has proved it. They are reverting back to a pay for service system. The socialist democrats in Europe have proved that. Each country is going bankrupt.

The business opportunity would be to teach the people who are self-insured or uninsured about the rip off of the healthcare insurance industry and to teach them how to save money.

How many start up companies do you guess are uninsured or under insured or not insured for catastrophic illness because they cannot afford the healthcare insurance premiums?

The chances are many start up employees will not get sick. True healthcare insurance should be a hedge against catastrophic illness.

If someone gets sick in a company, the company could pay the employee for the amount he spent before they reached the full deduction.

The high deductible individual policy is not tax deductible. If it were made tax deductible by citizen demand to congress through social networking the voice of the individual could be heard. Congress might be forced to act.

Start up companies and other companies would save money. These companies would be placed on the same playing field as companies who pay for employee insurance with pre tax dollars. The social network could even form an association of self-employed companies and enjoy the tax benefits and purchasing power of large corporations.

This would represent a threat to the healthcare insurance industry. They would do everything to stop. So would the government.

If you do the math for the government, the government would be saving much more money than it would collecting taxes. 

An appropriate social network could stop the healthcare insurance industry's grotesque business model in its tracks.

It could save billions of dollars. It could create incentive for people to take better care of themselves. 

Many large and small companies are self-insured. The law lets these companies deduct their healthcare insurance with pre tax dollars. These companies could offer my ideal medical saving account with a $7,500 trust account. They could then reinsure employees for over $7,500 with a reinsurance company. 

Employees would obtain first dollar coverage after the deductible is reached.

In the worst case the company would save $6,000 per employee. In the best case it would save $13,000 per employee.

http://www.lijit.com/search?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.lijit.com%2Fusers%2Fstanleyfeld&start_time=&p=g&blog_uri=http%3A%2F%2Fstanleyfeldmdmace.typepad.com%2F&blog_platform=&view_id=&link_id=7386&flavor=&q=ideal+medical+savings+accounts&x=0&y=0 

I suspect even the traditional insurance companies would provide the re-insurance.  These healthcare companies have already negotiated fees with physicians, hospitals and drug companies. 

If the healthcare insurance industry did not provide re-insurance its negotiated fees could be obtained easily.

A bank or a mutual fund could adjudicate the claims instantly.

The large corporations, who are self-insured, all have HR officers. The HR officers I have met either do not seem to have the bandwidth to investigate the possibility of the ideal medical saving account structure or they are trapped into outsourcing the details of the corporation’s self-insured healthcare plans to middlemen. I have a feeling the commitments of some with middlemen are long term.  

If all this could happen it would be an important first step in the development of social networking in healthcare and medical care.

Consumers need education for the care of their chronic disease such as diabetes, asthma, chronic lung disease, heart disease and chronic gastrointestinal diseases. Many of these diseases are a result of obesity.

If social networking could discourage the ever-increasing incidence of obesity, society would decrease healthcare costs dramatically. 

If patients learned how to manage their own disease the cost of medical care would decrease precipitously.  

Why?

Because 80% of the healthcare dollars spent on direct patient care are spent on the complications of chronic diseases that are not well managed by patients.

Many drug companies and medical device companies would advertise on these social networking sites.  

Consumers must drive the healthcare system in order for the healthcare system to be repaired. Not government or the healthcare insurance industry.

Consumers feel powerless at present. Empowering consumers through social networking will disrupt the entire healthcare systems supply chain for the better.

Consumers are up against a government that wants to tell them what they have to do. They are up against healthcare insurance companies that charge obscene premiums. They are up against hospitals, physicians and emergency rooms that have exorbitant charges.

Consumers are up against diseases such as obesity which precipitates many chronic diseases.

Consumers are frustrated and need leadership and guidance.

The phenomenal growth in social networking can give consumers the tool they need to control their health and drive the healthcare system.

Social networking is the only way to start a consumer driven healthcare movement. It has to happen before the medical care system is destroyed.

The young people expert (20-50 years old) in social networking have to become engaged. 

Those young people have to understand physician mentality and the importance of the patient physician relationship.

I will be happy to help in any way I can.

 

The opinions expressed in the blog “Repairing The Healthcare System” is, mine and mine alone

Please send the blog to a friend

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Permalink:

Patients and Physicians Must Control Health Care Costs

Stanley Feld M.D.,FACP,MACE

The primary stakeholders in the healthcare system are patients and physicians. The incentives for patients and physicians to save money are non existent. The secondary stakeholders have taken advantage of non existent incentives to create a healthcare system that generates ever increasing costs.

Patients and physicians are the only stakeholders that can control costs. They initiate the use of the healthcare system’s resources. 

Healthcare costs for medical procedures such as an MRI or CT scan have been found to vary by as much as 683% in the same town, depending on which physicians patients choose, according to a study by Change: Healthcare.

The implication is that individual physicians are responsible for the differences. Most physicians do not own MRIs, CAT scanners or PET scanners. Secondary stakeholders own the equipment. They price the procedures and profit from the equipment, not the physicians.

"There's been a barrage of studies that show differences from region to region," said Christopher Parks, founder of Change:healthcare. "That makes sense — California's more expensive than Alabama. But this 683% is within a 20-mile radius in your own town." 

This finding illustrates several dysfunctional issues in the healthcare system.  President Obama’s Healthcare Reform Act is causing these issues to surface as secondary stakeholders are beginning to adjust to the upcoming changes.

For a pelvic CT scan, they found that within one town in the Southwest, a person could pay as little as $230 for the procedure, or as a much as $1,800. For a brain MRI in a town in the Northeast, a person could pay $1,540 — or $3,500. 

The social contract in medicine is between patients and physicians.  Patients should choose physicians and physicians should care for the patients the best they can with integrated healthcare team approaches. Physicians should be the captains of this team approach. 

Patients should be at the center of medical care and be educated to make wise medical decisions.

Physicians should be the coaches and advisors to patients on how to make wise decisions and attain better health.

In the beginning, patients’ employers provided first dollar healthcare insurance coverage. Patients were not at any financial risk. There was no need for patients to care about medical costs. The healthcare costs were their employer’s problem. 

Healthcare insurance companies enjoyed this setup. The more they paid out in benefits the higher they could raise the insurance premiums. Premium increases resulted in higher profits. It worked until employers said stop.

The insurance companies take 40-60 cents out of every healthcare dollar. Medicare and Medicaid outsource administrative services to the healthcare insurance industry. The healthcare insurance industry also takes 40 to 60 cents out of every Medicare and Medicaid dollar.

In anticipation of a reduction in government reimbursement for Medicare and Medicaid, the healthcare insurance industry has raised private insurance premiums, decreased covered illnesses, increased deductibles and increased co-pays.  

The Healthcare insurance industry is also moving toward  "reference-based pricing."

These changes have increased the liability of consumers for out of pocket expenses as opposed to having first dollar coverage. 

Medicare has different allowable fees for procedures in different regions. Medicare pays 80% of the allowable fee after a patient meets his deductible. Providers are only allowed to bill patients 20%.  By law balanced billing is illegal. It does not matter what providers charge for a procedure. Providers cannot bill patients for the balance of beyond the allowable fee. The Medicare fee is the most the provider can receive for a procedure.

“The Medicare Balanced Billing Program works to protect Medicare beneficiaries from being billed by healthcare practitioners for amounts beyond those approved by Medicare. The program investigates and takes action against those practitioner who violate the law.

Many providers are refusing to accept Medicare payment as Medicare reimbursement decreases. These providers can charge patients their fee. It is the patient’s responsibility to know if providers accept Medicare reimbursement. If providers do not accept Medicare, patients should understand their liability for the fee. Patients are liable for the total bill.   

Providers also contract with private healthcare companies. Some providers try to get the highest fee possible for the procedure. Private insurance companies pay different amounts depending on their need to build physician networks. This results in the wide spread in price in the same area. When providers are under contract with private insurers they cannot collect more than the contract price for a procedure. 

"It was eye-opening," said Howard McClure, CEO of Change:healthcare.

McClure said health plans are moving toward "reference-based pricing," in which they look at the average price of a procedure for a region, then say that's all they'll reimburse. But if a patient does not know how much a procedure costs, he or she gets stuck with the remainder of the bill if it goes above that average price.

"It helps the small business," McClure said, "but the consumer's left out in the cold."

Healthcare insurance coverage is changing with “reference-based pricing.”  Consumers are getting stuck with the retail price for procedures. The healthcare industry is using this to keep premiums down for business and compete for employer business.

Only consumers owning their healthcare dollars can stop this. President Obama cannot unless he controls the entire system and dictates prices. It never works because people figure out how to get around restrictions.     

Patients are led to believe that physicians are sending patients to higher priced providers for procedures because physicians will make more money.

Most physicians do not know the prices patients are charged for referred procedures.

Most physicians do not own MRIs, CAT scans or Pet Scanners. It is against the law to receive kickbacks.

It is essential that providers make their fee transparent to all providers and consumers.  Then consumers can choose wisely and create price competition.

Consumers must drive this process to create competitive pricing. Third party payment does not work.

 Consumer driven healthcare using the ideal Medical Saving Account will make it happen. It is the only model that makes economic sense.

 Consumers would start caring about the price of services when making healthcare decisions.

The challenge is to teach consumers to change their mentality toward healthcare costs and force providers through competition to be accountable for these costs.   

This will never happen under President Obama’s administration.  His goal is to empower the government and not consumers. Under President Obama’s administration the healthcare system will become more dysfunctional and further increase the deficit to unsustainable levels.

 

The opinions expressed in the blog “Repairing The Healthcare System” are, mine and mine alone.