fbpx

Monthly Archives: April 2016

The legal risks of waiving copays are very, very real

Effectively collecting copays (or coinsurance for procedures) has become much more important in recent years. One reason is that they've become a bigger proportion of total reimbursement. Once just a token $5 or $10 payment, office visit copays have increased to $30, $40, or even $60 in many cases. They now often account for a third or more of the revenue your practice can receive for these services. Not collecting them reliably is a threat to your profitability. Besides ensuring full reimbursement, there's another, equally compelling reason for your practice to master time-of-service copay collections: Your payer contracts almost certainly require it. If you've been in the habit of waiving copays or billing for them, you are probably violating these agreements. Health plans view copays differently than you probably do. Copays are not just a way to reduce their portion of your fees; they're designed to discourage patients from receiving services they don't need. Copays are supposed to help keep patients on the side of the payer in the battle to reduce costs. That's why your contracts will usually state that you agree to collect them, and often further state you should do so at the time of service. (Some waivers may be allowable, but only when certain hardship conditions are verified.) Contracts also often contain language about the plan being entitled to the same discounts you give other parties -- so that if you give the patient a discount by waiving any amount they owe, you need to give the plan the same discount. (This might mean you owe the plan 100% off if you waived a patient's full copay!) For these reasons, routinely waiving copays can lead to serious problems in the event your practice is audited. If your practice frequently waives these payments -- or if some of your clinicians choose to -- it's important to get everyone up to speed on why you need to collect as you've agreed to in your contracts. I've written quite a few papers recently on front office technology that can help you collect more easily and reliably, while keeping the focus

By |2022-01-01T22:51:56-08:00April 29th, 2016|

Will regulation fix payer directory errors?

A few months ago, I was honored to host a #kareochat (thanks, @gokareo!) about filling the appointment schedule. The discussion hit on one of my favorite topics: payer directories. Repeat visitors to this space and/or readers of my ebook probably already know that I consider payer directory listings to be the top reputation management priority for most practices (at least if you're aiming to serve insured patients). Even though these directories aren't always near the top of a physician or specialty search in Google or Bing, most patients will know the name of their insurance plan, and will go to the plan's site to be sure any physician they consider seeing will take their plan. (This goes double for any patient who has been burned by accidentally seeing a doctor out-of-network, resulting in an unexpected bill.) Patients will find their plan directories, and use them to screen out doctors who don't take their insurance. Of course, the other reason I put payer directory listings at the top of the monitoring priorities is that they are so often wrong! It's logical to assume that the directories would be updated automatically or that the payers should take care of this without assistance from providers. But even though payers are nominally responsible, providers have to be vigilant, because the stakes for themselves and their patients are too high, and payers just aren't getting the job done. @drtom_kareo (Dr. Tom Giannulli, medical director at Kareo) pointed out that legislation is coming (SB 137) in California to mandate payers correct their directories. Plus, the CMS has already announced that it will fine Medicare Advantage plans for errors in their physician listings. In theory, this will push the payers to get their directory houses in order -- right? While the legislation is going to bring more attention to the problem, which is great, I don't think solving it will be so easy.  Here are a few reasons why I think it's not that simple. Are payers deliberately ignoring their directories?  I don't think so. The idea that legislation is the push that insurance companies need to

By |2022-01-01T22:51:56-08:00April 13th, 2016|
Go to Top