Quantcast
Business Resources
by Category








Try our "Virtual Buyers Guide!"
-flip through the pages!
-search by keyword!
-download to your desktop!
-forward to a colleague!
< Home  < Articles  < Article Details

 
 
PayerView: Examining Payer Performance
In its third year, PayerView is still making a difference.
By Pamela Moore



Athenahealth’s data only represents a portion of each payer’s provider network, but we required a high volume of claims before reporting on any given payer.



In total, then, the data you’ll see on these pages summarizes claims performance from more than 12,000 providers representing more than 30 million charge lines. Services were billed from 39 states to payers in 45 states.

We took all those numbers and ranked payers based on the following measures — see “What We Measured” for a visual breakdown: (For exact definitions and even more data, please visit www.athenapayerview.com.)

  • Days in accounts receivable (A/R). How many days did it take a physician to get paid from the date the charge was entered in athenahealth’s system? Why it matters: The faster you get paid, the more the money is worth. What it’s worth: 25 percent of total score.

  • First pass resolve rate. The percentage of claims that were resolved (either paid or passed on to the patients) the first time they were sent in. Why it matters: This measures how much administrative angst it takes to get paid. What it’s worth: 25 percent of the total score.

  • Denial rate. The percentage of claims that required back-end work, whether the claim was actually denied or just pending. Why it matters: Whatever the reason for the extra work, it takes you longer to get paid and costs you in administrative time — if anyone on your staff actually bothers to follow up on the payment at all. What it’s worth: 20 percent of the total score.

  • Percentage of patient liability. How much of patients’ bills are paid directly by patients? Why it matters: Consumer-directed healthcare is a growing trend. But most physician offices aren’t set up to collect in full at the time of service. And, not every payer is set up to give physicians the information they need to do so. What it’s worth: 7.5 percent of the total score.

  • Claim denial transparency. What percentage of denied claims were paid with just one resubmission? Why it matters: This measures how clearly the payer explains its reason when it denies a claim. What it’s worth: 7.5 percent of the total score.

  • Percentage of claims requiring medical documentation. This measures the rate at which claims are returned by a payer demanding medical documentation. Why it matters: It’s an expensive process, and demeaning for physicians to have to justify their medical judgment to insurance bureaucrats. What it’s worth: 7.5 percent of the total score.

  • Rate of noncompliance with the correct coding initiative (CCI). Any physician will tell you that one of the worst things about payers is that each one has its own unique set of rules and coding expectations. We dinged payers when they refused payment on claims because their rules were different than national coding standards. Why it matters: How can any billing office keep track of hundreds of rules from dozens of plans? What it’s worth: 7.5 percent of the total score.

    We didn’t measure how much payers pay. What we’re getting at here is how hard it is to collect what you are owed.

    For data on reimbursement levels, download our 2007 Physicians Practice Fee Schedule Survey Results to get a better sense of what payers should pay — and what you should be charging.

    Judging national payers



  • Additional Resources
    View more articles from the June 2008 issue

    View more articles related to Finance

    View more articles related to Strategy

     
     


     

    Home | Contact Us | Subscribe  | Site Map | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy | Change Zip Code
    CancerNetwork | ConsultantLive | Diagnostic Imaging | Psychiatric Times
     SearchMedica

     Subscribe to Physicians Practice RSS

    Connect with Physicians Practice on

               

    Copyright © 2010 UBM Medica LLC,, a United Business Media company.
     
    ADDITIONAL ONLINE RESOURCES FROM UBM MEDICA
    Featured Resources > Pediatric Asthma > ASCO Conference Report > APA Conference Report > Consumer Healthcare Information > Patient and Caregiver Resource
    CancerNetwork > Cancer diagnosis, treatment, and prevention > Podcasts for Oncologists > Cancer Patient Resources > Oncology Areas of Confusion > Oncology News > Cancer Management Handbook > Oncology E-Learning > Oncology Practice Management
    Consultant Live > Practical Clinical Advice > Medical Photoclinic > Diagnosing and Treating H1N1 flu (swine flu) > Primary Care Conference Reports > Primary Care CME
    Diagnostic Imaging > Medical Imaging News and Features > Medical Imaging and Radiology White Papers > Radiology Conference Reports > Radiology Special Reports > Radiology Careers > Radiology Net Seminars > Imaging Trends and Advances > CT Dose Issues and Articles > Molecular Imaging Articles
    Psychiatric Times > Psychiatry Careers > Psychiatric News and Special Reports > Psychiatric Clinical Scales > Psychiatric Times Blog > Psychiatry Career Opportunities > Psychiatry CME > DSM-V
    Physicians Practice > Practice Management > Practice Management Webinars > Medical Buyers Guide > Medical Coding > Practice Management Tools > Practice Management Podcasts > Today's Practice - Practice Management Resource
    SearchMedica > Professional Medical Search > Medical Search Tips Newsletter > Medical Search News



     
     
    -- Advertisement --


    In Summary
    The third annual PayerView reveals how easy — or hard — it is to work with payers:

  • Aetna, Cigna, and Humana were the top three performers nationally. Champus/TRICARE came in last.

  • Days in A/R increased slightly, on average, for national payers, but decreased for regional payers.

  • NPI hassles are to blame for some poor performance.

  • Electronic tools smoothed physician-payer relations, especially for regional payers.

  • Consumer-directed initiatives are still on the rise, though more slowly than in past years. Practices need to focus more on patient collections.

  •  
    Read More About It
    Want to learn more about payer relationships? Try reading these:

  • Learn how to assess your payer contracts by reading “Operations: Monitor Payer contracts.”

  • Find out if payers are paying you well by reviewing our 2007 Physicians Practice Fee Schedule Survey Results.