Tag Archives: Integration

A Little Disruption is a Good Thing

Staying on the topic of single payer, this time discussing its impact on workers’ comp, David De Paolo wrote an article today that describes Colorado’s Amendment 69 as a disruption of the status quo, and he points out that the tech industry has disrupted business models and industries for several decades and that the work comp industry needs to be disrupted as well.

He goes on to say that ColoradoCare (Amendment 69) is a debate and idea that is long overdue. The arguments against the idea, De Paolo writes, of a single payer system strikes him as simply entrenched interests seeking to protect their turf and business models.

Earlier this week, Workers’ Comp Insider published an article, “It’s A Colorado Rocky Mountain Low” that opposed the approval by Colorado voters this November of the amendment, using the reasons David cites in his piece, and some of the usual misleading distortions that only confuse voters on substantive issues such as this.

Readers will recall my previous two posts, the first, “Colorado Gets Real on Workers’ Comp and Health Care” which introduced the Amendment and the push to bring the two silos of workers’ comp and health care together, and the second, “Colorado “Single Payer” in Health Care Industry’s Sights” which described the health care industry’s attempts to derail the amendment’s approval.

The issue of combining the two silos was brought up by yours truly in an earlier post, “Betting the Farm“, and as I wrote then, not an original idea of mine. Yet, by reading David’s post, and the one by LynchRyan, you get the feeling that the only reason not to combined the two is greed and protection of vested interests.

Yet, in the business world, mergers happen all the time. And while it is true that some are not approved by the Justice Department or other government agencies, most mergers do take place.

The argument about issues like return to work being the purview of insurance companies under work comp is specious at best, because if we consider two patients, both of whom injure the same body part and require the same surgery to repair that injury, one must be put in a return to work program because he is covered for his injury under work comp; the other does not because his injury is not work-related, but did cause him to miss time from work. Does that make sense? Doesn’t the second patient also need to get back to work?

It is not logical to divide injured individuals by who picks up the check. It is more logical to treat all injuries the same, and to treat all medical issues the same, no matter if they are work-related or not. Getting cancer from occupational exposure to carcinogenic chemicals is no different than getting cancer from smoking, or being genetically predisposed as in breast cancer, or other types of cancer. They both are going to be seen by an oncologist, maybe even the same one if they live in the same area.

So keeping workers’ comp and health care separate and unequal, like education and social accommodations once did to African-Americans, is not only stupid, it is wrong. ColoradoCare is one way this can be accomplished, and as David points out, “Nobody really knows how all of this will play out.”

Maybe it is time we find out.


I am willing to work with any broker, carrier, or employer interested in saving money on expensive surgeries, and to provide the best care for their injured workers or their client’s employees.

Ask me any questions you may have on how to save money on expensive surgeries under workers’ comp.

I am also looking for a partner who shares my vision of global health care for injured workers.

I am also willing to work with any health care provider, medical tourism facilitator or facility to help you take advantage of a market segment treating workers injured on the job. Workers’ compensation is going through dramatic changes, and may one day be folded into general health care. Injured workers needing surgery for compensable injuries will need to seek alternatives that provide quality medical care at lower cost to their employers. Caribbean and Latin America region preferred.

Call me for more information, next steps, or connection strategies at (561) 738-0458 or (561) 603-1685, cell. Email me at: richard_krasner@hotmail.com.

Will accept invitations to speak or attend conferences.

Connect with me on LinkedIn, check out my website, FutureComp Consulting, and follow my blog at: richardkrasner.wordpress.com.

Transforming Workers’ Comp Blog is now viewed all over the world in over 250 countries and political entities. I have published nearly 300 articles, many of them re-published in newsletters and other blogs.

Share this article, or leave a comment below.

Advertisements

Colorado “Single Payer” in Health Care Industry’s Sights

Earlier this month, I wrote that Colorado was introducing a ballot initiative for single payer.

As reported today by Don McCanne of Physicians for a National Health Plan, and published on Friday in The Intercept, business interests in Colorado and many of the largest lobbying groups around the country and in the state are raising funds to defeat Amendment 69, the single-payer ballot question going before voters this November.

One organization leading the move to defeat this amendment is the Council of Insurance Agents & Brokers, a national trade group.

As quoted in the article by the author, Lee Fang, “The council urges Coloradans to protect employer-provided insurance and oppose Proposition 69.

The group has dispatched Steptoe & Johnson, a lobbying firm to analyze the bill.

Other lobbying groups that represent major for-profit health care interests in Colorado, including hospitals and insurance brokers, Fang writes, are similarly mobilizing against Amendment 69.

The Colorado Association of Commerce & Industry, a trade group led in part by HCA HealthOne, a subsidiary of HCA, one of the largest private hospital chains in the country is soliciting funds to defeat single payer. The business coalition to defeat the measure also includes the state’s largest association of health insurance brokers, Fang reported.

Dr. McCanne wrote in response to the Fang article that, “In the meantime, the opponents know that their task does not involve educating the public on the facts. They do not have to engage the other side in a information battle over the truth. They merely have to appeal to the passion of the voters. Simple rhetorical soundbites are usually enough to convince the voters that they do not have to waste their time studying some complicated government scheme in order to know how to vote on it. Just look at some of the rhetoric of the opposition group, Coloradans for Coloradans: “doubling the state budget,” “diminishing accessibility and quality,” and “creating an unaccountable, massive bureaucracy.” Who would support that? No need to try to find out the truth.”

What does this really mean?

It means this: that until the whole US health care system collapses of its own weight, inefficiencies, complexities, absurdities, bureaucracy, and stupidity, that no matter who runs for president promising free health care for all, it won’t happen.

Talking in generalities, wishing and hoping that a mass movement (or political revolution) will change things, is only magical thinking and pixie dust. Given the political polarization of the US electorate, and the lack of thinking on the part of those who are supporting the GOP candidates for president and for Congress, single payer nationwide or statewide will not happen until every single American cannot get any health care coverage.

How did the UK get single payer? Thank the Luftwaffe for destroying the British health care system before WWII. Don’t believe me? Just read what Winston Churchill said (Conservative Party – like our Republicans, only smarter):

Our policy is to create a national health service in order to ensure that everybody in the country irrespective of means, age, sex or occupation shall have equal opportunities to benefit from the best and most up-to-date medical and allied services available.”

How did Germany get a kind of single payer system? Otto von Bismarck. And sixty years later, when the most conservative government Germany ever had came to power, not even a paperhanging, SOB with a Charlie Chaplin moustache could undo it.

Why can’t we have single payer? Read Thomas Jefferson, John Locke, Adam Smith, Edmund Burke, the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence. Any mention of health care or health insurance? No, because they were more concerned with “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness” however they defined that in the eighteenth century.

Freedom was another thing they were concerned with, such as the freedom to have what is yours remain yours, so that the government can’t take it to spend on such extravagant luxuries as health care and education for all.

But as I wrote back in 2013, the founders did create a tax-based health plan for merchant sailors because it was affecting our national economy and trade. But it was only for a select population group, as was Medicare and Medicaid and SHIP, and Tricare last century.

But the health plan for sailors was never challenged in the courts, nor was it ever a part of any political campaign for the Presidency to be repealed; however, that is not stopping the GOP and their allies from doing the same thing to the ACA, or to any proposal for single payer.

The US is, as that paperhanging SOB is quoted as saying before he took cyanide and shot himself, “the ultra-capitalists”, and therefore, the free market and the profit motive wins out.

You want single payer, Bernie? Start learning the words to “The Internationale”.

 

Borderless Healthcare: A Model for the Future of Medical Care in Workers’ Comp

By now, many of you, my faithful, and not so faithful readers (and critics) have been aware of my strong interest and passion about implementing medical tourism into workers’ comp.

The critics have not silenced me, they have only made me more determined than ever to get the word out…MEDICAL CARE UNDER WORKERS’ COMP IN THE US WILL HAVE TO GLOBALIZE, OR ELSE IT WILL FAIL TO PROVIDE ADEQUATE CARE AT LOWER COST AND AT EQUAL OR BETTER QUALITY THAN WHAT IS RECEIVED CURRENTLY.

I capitalized the above because in the three plus years I have been writing this blog, it takes a bit of shouting to get heard in this world.

To make the point I just shouted, I participated yesterday in a webinar on Bloomberg BNA.com produced by Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP/Manatt Jones Global Solutions.

For all of you political junkies out there, Charles Manatt was the Chairman of the Democratic Party from 1981 to 1985, in the first term of that has-been Hollywood actor the GOP shoved down our throats.

The webinar, “Healthcare without Borders: The Opportunities and Challenges of Medical Tourism”, was an almost ninety minute, four-part presentation given by two Managing Directors, a Partner, and a Medical Director of a Mexican hospital system.

The presenters were Jon Glaudemans, Managing Director of Manatt Health Solutions, Andrew Rudman, Managing Director of Manatt Jones Global Solutions, Linda Tiano, Partner with Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP, and Dr. Alfonso Vargas Rodriguez, Medical Director of Hospitales H+.

While the focus of the middle of the presentation dealt with conducting medical tourism in Mexico, the information presented by Mr. Glaudermans was concerned about the trends in healthcare that are pointing to greater demand for medical tourism, and are elaborated in the following graphic:

Megatrends

Source:  2016+Medical+Tourism+Deck.pdf Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP

Here are the key points from Mr. Glaudemans’ presentation slides:

  • Consumers pay more and make more care decision, using social
    media/apps to acquire price/network data.
  • Providers take risk for population/patient/product outcomes, requiring new care models and contracts
  • Care monitoring and delivery move out of traditional settings, shifting the locus of/focus on patient loyalty
  • Providers and payers consolidate to manage costs and enhance power, fighting for CM (care management) space
  • States become more active regulators and purchasers, creating marketplace mosaics and more “experiments”
  • Data on health status and effectiveness become widely available, changing practice and payment patterns
  • Bigger datasets yield insights, informing personalized care and challenging price-setting and patient privacy
  • Employers’ role continues to erode, while exchange plans sharpen focus on multi-year patient loyalty
  • Digital natives’ and baby boomers’ interests coalesce, forcing focus on new ‘late-life/end-of-life’ care models
  • Visibility into global pricing and care models improves, requiring providers to justify value and pricing
  • Social determinants accepted as major cost driver, leading to increased focus on service integration

Naturally, many of these megatrends will not pertain to workers’ comp, but given the fact that comp sometimes follows the lead of healthcare, it is not out of the realm of possibility that some of these trends will be felt in medical care for workers’ comp.

Andrew Rudman’s presentation focused on what medical tourism is, and why Mexico is an ideal medical tourism destination for Americans. The main thrust of his presentation is the proximity to the US, the flight times between major American cities and those Mexican medical tourism destinations he focused on in the discussion.

Mr. Rudman also provided a cost comparison chart between US and Mexican costs of certain medical procedures, which is shown below.

Cost comparison 2012

Source:  2016+Medical+Tourism+Deck.pdf Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP/PROMEXICO

Dr. Rodriquez discussed how Mexican doctors become certified in their sub-specialties and how they get re-certified once they are certified by their respective boards. In addition, he showed slides about the various hospitals in the Hospitales H+ system, and for our purposes here, outlined the price differential for certain orthopedic surgeries at the various hospitals in their system versus that of the US.

Ortho surgery prices

Source:  2016+Medical+Tourism+Deck.pdf Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP/Hospitales H+

Lastly, Linda Tiano covered the legal issues of medical tourism, and those of you who have been reading this blog for three years, know that my original paper covered some of these issues, and I raised them in my presentation in Reynosa, Mexico in November 2014.

Here are the key points Linda made regarding medical tourism benefits.

Medical Tourism Benefits

Source:  2016+Medical+Tourism+Deck.pdf Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP

3rd Party Facilitator

Source:  2016+Medical+Tourism+Deck.pdf Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP

Liability issues

Source:  2016+Medical+Tourism+Deck.pdf Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP

HIPAA

Source:  2016+Medical+Tourism+Deck.pdf Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP

State Regs

Source:  2016+Medical+Tourism+Deck.pdf Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP

At the end, I asked the question, “do you see the possibility of implementing medical tourism into workers’ comp, and what are the legal issues with that?” Ms. Tiano mentioned the state-specific laws regarding workers’ comp, and said that the workers’ comp industry is way behind health care, to which I heartily agreed.

So you can see from this brief, but thorough review of the presentation, that medical tourism is a serious research area for many interested parties. Yet, you guys in work comp refuse to see, hear or speak about the truth of what is happening around you. So here is another picture for you.

hear-no-evil-see-no-evil-speak-no-evil

This is the workers’ comp industry on the subject of global health care and medical tourism…three deaf, dumb and blind monkeys clinging to the same old statutes, laws and regulations that haven’t changed since the days of Taft and Wilson.

So when are you going to catch up to the rest of the world, and to the globalization of health care? In the 23rd century? When are you going to admit to yourselves that automation, new technology, the Internet of Things, telemedicine, etc., are going to make you guys OBSOLETE… to borrow a term from “The Twilight Zone”.

I have a vision for the future of medical care in workers’ comp. What you have is the same old, same old, and expecting different results. That’s not only crazy, that is doing a disservice to the people workers’ comp is supposed to be for, the claimant.

But suit yourselves…the dinosaurs are waiting to greet you.

 

 

 

SPOTLIGHT Interview – October 31, 2013

This is the original interview published on October 31, 2013 by Medical Travel Today.com.

Medical Travel Today (MTT): Tell us your position in the medical tourism industry, as well as your thoughts on integrating medical tourism into workers’ compensation cases in the U.S.

Richard Krasner (RK): Currently, I am a blogger, blogging about the implementation of medical tourism into workers’ compensation.

I first began looking into integrating medical tourism into workers’ compensation when I needed a topic for a paper in my Health Law class as part of my M.H.A. degree program in March of 2011. A lawyer who was working for a medical tourism facilitator company at that time, and who had written an article in a law journal about medical tourism, gave me the idea after my first topic did not pan out. She thought that the legal barriers to implementing international medical providers into workers’ compensation through medical provider networks was a good idea, and since I had a small interest in the subject of medical tourism, I submitted that as my topic to the instructor.

He gave me his approval and, as I started to do my research, I found many articles on medical tourism and nothing on medical tourism and workers’ compensation, so I knew my task was a difficult one. But as the point of the paper was to write about a legal issue and persuade people one way or the other, I felt that I could mention the lack of literature on the subject and perhaps open up dialogue in that area. I then found a roundtable discussion from the January/February 2008 issue of the journal Telemedicine and e-health.

In the discussion, I found something that I had been looking for, but had not expected in a medical journal: a validation from four of the participants for my idea to implement medical tourism into workers’ compensation. I made their discussion the centerpiece of my paper, and thus my argument in favor of implementation. They said essentially that they thought that medical tourism could work for non-emergent, i.e., non-emergencies or long-range issues, such as knee or hip replacement, chronic back injury and repetitive action injuries, and that it would not be a leading offering. That is when the light bulb went on, and I realized that it could be accomplished as an option for the injured worker to consider.

Initially, my research consisted of finding articles that discussed medical tourism in destinations, such as India, Singapore and Thailand, and my thought then was that it might be a stretch to send injured workers that far away, but that maybe it could be done. Later on, as I got more involved in medical tourism through my attendance at the 5th World Medical Tourism and Global Healthcare Congress in October 2012, and through conversations online with another lawyer, I realized that the best chance for this to happen was in Latin America and the Caribbean, and that given the rise of the Latino population in the U.S., sending patients home to their home countries for treatment would present no language or cultural barriers, and would allow friends and family in those countries to visit them during recovery, which will improve their self-esteem and improve their recovery time.

I have since come to believe that all injured workers could be offered this as an option, not just those of Latin or Caribbean origin.

MTT: How will the integration benefit individuals, health insurance companies, and the entire medical community, both domestically and internationally?

RK: I believe first and foremost that medical tourism will have its most important benefit on the individual because of some of the things I mentioned above, namely little or no cultural or language barriers to overcome between Spanish or English in most cases, or between Portuguese or other languages in the region. Also, as I said, their friends and families back home can visit, which would make their recovery more relaxing, more pleasant and would show them that the patient is not sitting at home just collecting a check. It would also give the patient greater self-esteem and speed recovery. Finally, by being treated in the better hospitals in the home country, a patient’s friends and family will see that their loved one is being cared for by the best doctors and at the best facility in their country.

I think the benefit for the health insurance company or, in this case, the workers’ compensation carrier would be that they will not have to pay for expensive procedures, such as hip or knee repair/replacement, shoulder surgery, spinal fusion surgery or carpal tunnel surgery. This is despite the fact that many states have fee schedules for workers’ compensation, which tells providers how much to charge the carrier for each procedure, and which may be less than the normal fees charged. Nonetheless, as the recent New York Times article indicates, the U.S. has the highest cost for healthcare, and it is not slowing down, nor has the average medical cost for lost-time workers’ compensation claims, as I have written about in my white paper and my blog.

I think for the entire medical community domestically and internationally, it will have several benefits, the first of which will be the realization that healthcare is globalizing and that it is no longer possible to consider that quality medical care is available only in the developed world. Second, it will lead to the development of international accreditation standards, quality standards and other standards that up to now have hampered medical tourism’s expansion and growth.

These standards will take time to be adopted and will be expensive to implement for the medical tourism facilities involved, as it has already been for the implementation of other standards and forms of accreditation, such as from the Joint Commission International.

Thirdly, it will have the benefit of bringing American patients to medical providers in other countries, those who otherwise would never be seen by foreign doctors except for those who have gone to foreign-born doctors practicing here in the U.S., whether in private practice or in a hospital setting. Fourth, and this is more of an issue with workers’ compensation cases, doctors abroad will be able to get broad experience treating work-related injuries that they have never seen, thus adding to their medical experience, and providing their fellow citizens with that experience should they ever require it.

Medical tourism will open up global healthcare to all inhabitants of this planet, not just those looking for cosmetic surgery, or procedures that are too expensive or unavailable in their home countries. It will certainly open it up to those who otherwise could not afford to travel out of their country for treatment.

MTT: What would you say are the steps necessary to take in order for medical tourism to be integrated into workers’ compensation effectively?

RK: First, there has to be a removal of all or many of the legal barriers that I mentioned in my white paper, as well as many others that I could not or did not mention. Also, there has to be some understanding on how the legal issues surrounding medical tourism can be solved such as malpractice, legal liability, privacy issues, medical records transfers, etc.

There are financial steps that need to be addressed, such as which currency the payments will be made in, any incentives to injured workers, referring physicians, treating physicians, destination hospitals, as well as travel insurance coverage for things not covered under workers’ compensation. And lastly there has to be a willingness on the part of employers and insurance companies, third party administrators, and lawyers to accept medical tourism as part of workers’ compensation. I have discussed this with several people recently through emails, and in the past six months since beginning my blog, and have written about this as well.

As the Chinese say, a journey of a thousand miles begins with the first step. An industry like the workers’ compensation industry in the U.S., which is concerned with issues, such as pain medication abuse, physician dispensing of drugs and dealing with cost-curbing strategies that have failed, must come to the realization that the journey for them must begin now — before costs skyrocket any further.

MTT: What can you see being potential deterrents in integrating medical travel benefits into workers compensation?

RK: First of all, let me say that I don’t have all the answers, and I cannot foresee all contingencies and problems associated with traveling abroad for care. But I do want to make this clear so that your readers will not think that I don’t know what I am talking about, or that they will think that integrating medical tourism into workers’ compensation will be easy and not fraught with difficulties and complications.

It will not be easy, there are and will be complications from flying after undergoing surgery abroad, just as there are if the patient was treated at the local hospital. I am not a medical person, so my knowledge of how patients will tolerate air travel after surgery or what complications will arise is beyond my experience. But I can say this: I don’t see a difference between a patient who traveled abroad for medical care as a private patient for cosmetic, body improvement or other forms of surgery usually associated with medical tourism and a patient who is traveling abroad for surgery as a result of an on-the-job injury. Yes, there are differences in the process of treatment and aftercare and recovery, but if the private patient can develop complications, so too can the workers’ compensation patient.

To answer the question then, I think deterrents include a lack of will, fear of lawsuits in countries with laws that do not favor the insurance company or the employer, malpractice insurance and legal liability that does not meet American standards, employee choice to stay at home, and pressure from special interest groups like doctors, hospitals, pain clinics, rehab facilities, trial lawyers, etc.

MTT: During a time of rapid healthcare reform, why do you think medical tourism hasn’t been connected to workers compensation already?

RK: Because there is so much uncertainty over the impact the Affordable Care Act will have, not only on healthcare, but also on workers’ compensation. In my research on that subject, I found that there will be little immediate impact, but down the line there will be, especially as more people get health insurance, and also because of the doctor and nurse shortage, which will affect both healthcare and workers’ compensation.

There are critics of the law who say it will raise costs, and then there are those who say it will lower costs, as some have already pointed out recently. But only time will tell who is right and who is wrong. Finally, I don’t think many in the workers’ compensation industry have ever considered looking abroad, except to plan their next vacation.

MTT: Is there anything else you would like to add at this point that you think is significant in terms of medical tourism, workers’ compensations and/or the integration of the two?

RK: Yes, as I said in my blog post, The Faith of My Conviction, what is needed is the will to do it, the courage to make it happen, the hard work to get it there, and the determination to bring the two industries together. I have had experts tell me that it won’t happen, but I pointed out right away in my post the discussion I found between the four medical professionals, and I believe that as medical professionals they have a better understanding of the issues involved than I do as a layman. I trust their judgment of the issue and defer to them for my belief that it can be done.

So who is right and who is wrong? I don’t know the answer to that, but I do know this: for 20 years, the average medical cost for lost-time claims has gone from around $8,100 to almost $30,000 with no decrease in cost, but with a slowdown in the rate of increase. Is that progress? Is that a sign that all other avenues tried have not succeeded? Perhaps it will take higher costs to wake people up to the reality that medical care, like all other goods and services, always goes to those places where the goods or services can be produced at cheaper cost with better quality.

Complications Insurance for Medical Tourism: Coverage for Implementing Medical Tourism into Workers’ Comp

Once again, I am turning to the medical tourism facilitator, Trip4Care for a brilliant blog piece on medical travel that should be of keen interest to those in the workers’ comp world who pooh-pooh my idea for medical travel and workers’ comp. You can connect with Trip4Care by email.

There are many companies that provide medical travel insurance, and by bundling it together with monoline work comp coverage, an employer can reap savings on expensive surgeries abroad, and provide their employees with the best care possible, at the lowest cost, and can get them back to work faster by having them recover in pleasant surroundings, instead of at home on a couch in front of the TV.

Here is the article:

http://trip4care.com/understanding-the-importance-of-complications-insurance-in-medical-tourism/

To deny this option to injured workers, while group health and private pay patients can go abroad, smacks of discrimination, class bias, racism, short-sightedness, and ignorance about the quality of medical care in other nations that is rapidly changing and catching up to that in the US and the rest of the Western world.

Imagine what this would do for peaceful understanding and cooperation, if the most common of us could see how the other half lives. I am not advocating going to war-torn countries, but to those that cater to medical travel patients, and that are relatively free of strife. This will help cement peace and respect for all nations.

——————————————————————————————————————————————

I am willing to work with any broker, carrier, or employer interested in saving money on expensive surgeries, and to provide the best care for their injured workers or their client’s employees.

Call me for more information, next steps, or connection strategies at (561) 738-0458 or (561) 603-1685, cell. Email me at: richard_krasner@hotmail.com. Ask me any questions you may have on how to save money on expensive surgeries under workers’ comp. Connect with me on LinkedIn and follow my blog at: richardkrasner.wordpress.com. Share this article, or leave a comment below.

Betting the Farm

David Dias, Founder and Chairman of Insurance Thought Leadership.com posted the following article to his site this afternoon:

http://insurancethoughtleadership.com/move-workers-comp-silo/?sthash.IZT1sXHd.mjjo#sthash.IZT1sXHd.v7TnXKZz.dpbs

The author, John Connell, is the President of the Western Region of EPIC Insurance Brokers and Consultants, and is responsible for Employee Benefits. Mr. Connell’s article brings to light something I have thought of when trying to explain implementing medical tourism into workers’ comp.

Imagine visiting a farm, and after being shown around the parts where the animals are kept, the farmer shows you his silos. There are two of them; one very big, and one very small.

Curious, you ask the farmer what is in the first silo, and he replies that that is where he stores his grain. Then you ask, what is in the second silo, and he replies, that that is where he stores his other grain.

Totally confused, you ask another dumb question of the farmer. “Why do you have two silos if you are just storing grain? What is different about the grain in the second silo that requires a separate silo?”, you ask.

He shakes his head, laughing at the city slicker, and replies that the grain in the first silo is from that field over there, and he points to a large wheat field. Then he tells you that the grain in the second silo is in a field in another direction, and informs you that there are certain rules, regulations and laws that apply to not only growing the wheat that is stored in that silo, but also how it is stored in the silo as well.

At this point, you are dazed and confused, because it’s just wheat, no matter how you slice it in the end, but you are so incredulous that you shake your head in disbelief.

That is the point Mr. Connell is making, that it makes no sense to have two silos for the same thing, namely the medical care that is covered by group health plans and by workers’ compensation. And as he points out so well, there are companies that are combining the two, much like our farmer should with his wheat, and never mind the rules, regulations, laws and statutes about how to grow or store the grain from that second field. It is these rules and regulations, etc., that hinder improvements in how workers receive benefits from on the job injuries.

And somewhere in the new silos these companies are creating, there should be room to include medical travel as an option for injured workers to receive better care, and for their employers to realize lower cost for surgeries common to workers’ comp. I’d call that betting the farm on real change that will save money and provide workers with the best care possible.

————————————————————————————————————————————–

I am willing to work with any broker, carrier, or employer who is sick and tired of being bled by the Wall Street vulture capitalists and the entire medico-legal system known as workers’ comp, to save money, and to provide the best care for their injured workers or their client’s employees, while at the same time, helping to break the monopoly of the American health care cartel.

Call me for more information, next steps, or connection strategies at (561) 738-0458 or (561) 603-1685, cell. Email me at: richard_krasner@hotmail.com. Ask me any questions you may have on how to save money on expensive surgeries under workers’ comp. Connect with me on LinkedIn and follow my blog at: richardkrasner.wordpress.com. Share this article, or leave a comment below.

Demand for Bundling of Workers’ Comp and Health Insurance Increases

An article last Wednesday in Healthcare Finance News, by Anthony Brino, a Contributing Editor to Healthcare Finance News and the Editor of Healthcare Payer News, said that demand is increasing for the bundling of workers’ compensation and health insurance.

According to Brino, as more employers are seeking to integrate workers’ comp into their benefit packages, a range of market trends and regulations may be responsible for slowing what could be a natural fit.

However, according to Derek Jones, an actuary with Milliman, more Americans getting insurance should actually mean a healthier workforce, and therefore fewer workers’ comp claims. Jones said that what is more significant is the potential shift of costs between the workers’ comp and health insurance markets.

The article states that the new expanded availability of health insurance could shift payments for injuries and illness otherwise covered by work comp to health plans. Yet, as Jones is quoted in the article, “To the extent any of these claims are larger, there may be a significant cost shift from workers’ compensation to healthcare”.

Brino then says that treatments typically covered by health plans may end up being covered by workers’ comp. This development has not gone unnoticed by members of the workers’ comp industry in the run-up to the passage and subsequent enactment of the Affordable Care Act (ACA). Many of them have predicted cost shifting will occur from health care to workers’ comp.

While finishing my MHA degree in 2011, I took an elective course on the PPACA, and the term paper I wrote for this course concerned the impact of the ACA on workers’ compensation. I found at the time that there were three types of impacts in the literature of the time. The first was Direct, the second was Indirect, and the third was Speculative.

While I did not specifically address the issue of cost shifting, I would have to classify this as a speculative impact, as we shall see, and as Brino’s article mentions.

And according to Steve Kokulak, a senior vice president of workers’ compensation and no-fault insurance at MagnaCare, and a long-time connection of mine on LinkedIn, “You’re going to see changes in both directions, and it’s probably too early to tell at this point.”

A bigger issue, Kokulak states, is the fact that more employers would like to have their workers’ comp, health and disability insurance benefits more integrated. Kokulak also stated that MagnaCare has seen an interest from both employers and their health plans “for a total product combining health, workers’ comp and disability.”

A major barrier to offering an integrated product, according to Brino, is not that large insurers need to acquire workers’ comp companies, but that the patchwork quilt of state laws that in many places prevent the use of narrow provider networks.

This has been a part and parcel of not only my White Paper, but of my entire blogging experience to date. I said so in my blog article, Of ‘Aged Statutes and Old Case Law’ — Why Workers’ Comp Must Change and in my article, Statutes are not Statues ― Why Workers’ Comp Must Open up and Be Flexible.

Many states, Brino writes, regulate whether carriers and employers can offer direct care for injured workers and have mandated workers’ comp fee schedules. Yet, the “biggest impediment” to the kind of integrated insurance some employers are seeking is “a matter of bringing a product to the marketplace and making sure it’s compliant with state workers’ compensation rules.”

Or better yet, state workers’ comp rules need to be brought into the 21st century, and not bound by what transpired last century. There also needs to be a release of the stranglehold that lawyers, doctors, and workers’ comp services providers have on the workers’ comp system, another point I have raised time and again in my articles.

Kokulak said that it might be possible to move this piece of the group market in Oklahoma and Texas, which have let employers opt-out of state-workers’ compensation programs, as well as 10 other states that allow dispute resolutions with unions as an alternative to state workers’ compensation programs.

It would be far more simple, Kokulak said, for self-insured employers, such as municipalities, large corporations and union-based employers. “It is just a matter of creating a program that would be legally compliant, and finding service partners, the TPAs and PPO networks,” Kokulak went on to say.

Finally, an open question for integrating health, disability and workers’ compensation, Kokulak said, is whether health plans are open to covering possible cost-shifting. “Will a health carrier be willing to absolve the cost of the additional two to five percent in claims, and how much would they raise the premiums?”

I am confident that some way or another, injured workers will be able to get medical care abroad through the medical tourism industry, if their employers, their insurance carriers, and others make it possible for them to do so. The naysayers who have attacked my idea as “ridiculous and a non-starter” have not been vindicated by Brino’s article. Rather, it is I who have been vindicated here, as some of the things he mentions, I have already discussed in past articles, and most specifically, rather strongly.

No one knows what the future of health care, let alone health insurance will look like, or where some people will get their medical care. There may be, like the current marketplace, many options out there, medical tourism being one of them. And if integration in some form is achieved, medical tourism would stand to gain significantly from that integration, and it will not matter how the payment is made, as long as the patient gets the best care possible at the lowest cost possible.

The only other impediment is what is between most people’s ears. My advice to them after reading this article is this: Be careful for what you DON’T wish for, you just might get that instead.