TMA President Editorial in The Tennessean

Loading...

The following editorial by TMA President B W. Ruffner, Jr., MD, is published today in The Tennessean:

 

Dr. RuffnerQuality Patient Care Trumps Health Insurance Profits
 
A key com­po­nent of the recently enacted Patient Pro­tec­tion and Afford­able Care Act is a new restric­tion on the pro­por­tion of patient pre­mium dol­lars that health insur­ance com­pa­nies can spend on their own prof­its, CEO salaries and admin­is­tra­tive expenses.  
 
Begin­ning in 2011, each health insur­ance com­pany in every state must fol­low a “med­ical loss ratio” for­mula (MLR) to spend at least 80 per­cent of indi­vid­ual and small group insur­ance pre­mium dol­lars on direct patient med­ical care and activ­i­ties to improve health quality.
 
For large health insur­ance com­pa­nies, the min­i­mum is 85 per­cent. The remain­ing 15 per­cent or 20 per­cent, as the case may be, goes to the health plan as profit and admin­is­tra­tive costs.
 
Why should patients, physi­cians and the busi­ness com­mu­nity find this important?
 
First, if a health insurer does not meet the 80/85 per­cent stan­dard, it will owe rebates to its cus­tomers (employ­ers or indi­vid­u­als) for the difference.
 
Sec­ond, the more health plan money that is con­sid­ered “admin­is­tra­tive expense” as opposed to “qual­ity improve­ment” in the MLR for­mula, the more money that will be avail­able for direct patient health care.
 
Right now, the National Asso­ci­a­tion of Insur­ance Com­mis­sion­ers (NAIC) is in charge of draft­ing a pro­posal for Health and Human Ser­vices Sec­re­tary, Kath­leen Sebe­lius, to imple­ment the MLR rules, includ­ing defin­ing key terms and excep­tions to the law.
 
Tennessee’s com­mis­sioner of com­merce and insur­ance, Leslie A. New­man, is on the exec­u­tive com­mit­tee devel­op­ing the rules for the MLR for­mula. NAIC’s deci­sion will likely deter­mine whether a large chunk of our health insur­ance pre­mi­ums go for patient care or health plan profits.
 
Not sur­pris­ingly, health insur­ance com­pa­nies have lob­bied at every oppor­tu­nity to be able to shift their admin­is­tra­tive expenses into the qual­ity improve­ment cat­e­gory of the MLR.
 
Insur­ance com­pany expenses for things like uti­liza­tion review, health pro­fes­sional hot­lines, fraud expenses, net­work access and man­age­ment fees, accred­i­ta­tion, provider cre­den­tial­ing and sim­i­lar expenses are admin­is­tra­tive activ­i­ties that every health insurer must already do and are “the cost of doing busi­nesses.” NAIC should con­sider them as “qual­ity improve­ment” and cat­e­go­rize them as “admin­is­tra­tive expenses” in the MLR rules.
 
That will ensure that more of our health insur­ance pre­mi­ums will go toward direct patient med­ical care instead of health insur­ance indus­try profits.
 
Ten­nessee physi­cians, patients and employ­ers should urge NAIC and espe­cially Com­mis­sioner New­man to clearly dis­tin­guish qual­ity improve­ment and admin­is­tra­tive cost related expenses in the MLR. For the sake of a health­ier Ten­nessee, I urge the NAIC to do the right thing for patients.

 

 

 

0 Comments

Add Comment

Text Only 2000 character limit