News, Analysis, Trends, Management Innovations for
Clinical Laboratories and Pathology Groups

Hosted by Robert Michel

News, Analysis, Trends, Management Innovations for
Clinical Laboratories and Pathology Groups

Hosted by Robert Michel
Sign In

Are Payers Ganging up on Clinical Laboratories and Pathology Groups? Is this a Trend or Simply a Sign of Tougher Financial Times?

Medical laboratories today struggle to submit clean claims and be promptly and adequately reimbursed as health insurers institute burdensome requirements and audit more labs

Across the nation, clinical laboratories and anatomic pathology groups of all sizes struggle to get payment for lab test claims. Veteran lab executives say they cannot remember any time in the past when medical laboratories were challenged on the front-end with getting lab test claims paid while also dealing on the back-end with ever-tougher audits and unprecedented recoupment demands.

These issues center upon the new policies adopted by the Medicare program and private health insurers that make it more difficult for many clinical laboratories to be in-network providers, to obtain favorable coverage guidelines for their tests, and to have the documentation requested when auditors show up to inspect lab test claims. This is true whether the audit is conducted by a Medicare Recovery Audit Contractor (RAC) or a team from a private health insurer.

Source of Financial Pressure on Medical Laboratories in US

Another source of financial pressure on medical laboratories in the United States today is the ongoing increase in the number of patients who have high-deductible health plans—whether from their employer or from the Affordable Care Act’s Health Insurance Marketplace (AKA, health exchanges). The individual and family annual deductibles for these plans typically start at around $5,000 and go to $10,000 or more. Many labs are experiencing big increases in patient bad debt because they don’t have the capability to collect payment from patients when they show up in patient service centers (PSCs) to provide specimens.

Some of these developments make it timely to ask the question: Is it a trend for payers to gang up on clinical laboratories and pathology groups and make it tougher for them to be paid for the lab tests they perform? Multiple factors can be identified to support this thesis.

“Is it a coincidence that, in recent years, so many payers are initiating numerous requirements that add complexity to how labs submit claims for lab tests and how they get paid?” asked Richard Faherty of RLF Consulting LLC. Faherty was formerly Executive Vice President, Administration, with BioReference Laboratories, Inc. “I can track four distinct developments that, collectively, mean that fewer lab claims get paid, expose clinical laboratories to extremely rigorous audits with larger recoupment demands, and heighten the risk of fraud and abuse allegations due to use of contract or third-party sales and marketing representatives who represent independent medical lab companies.”

Faherty described the first of his four developments as prior-authorization requirements for molecular and genetic tests. “Health insurers are reacting to the explosion in molecular and genetic testing—both in the number of unique assays that a doctor can order and the volume of orders for these often-expensive tests—by establishing stringent prior-authorization requirements,” he noted.

More Prior-Authorization Requirements for Molecular, Genetic Tests

“At the moment, many clinical lab companies and pathology groups are attempting to understand the prior-authorization programs established by Anthem (which became effective on July 1) and UnitedHealthcare (which became effective on November 1),” explained Faherty. “Just these two prior-authorization programs now cover as many as 80 million beneficiaries. There are plenty of complaints from physicians and lab companies because the systems payers require them to use are not well-designed and quite time-consuming.

“One consequence is that many lab executives complain that they are not getting paid for genetic tests because their client physicians are unable to get the necessary prior authorization—yet the lab decides to perform the test to support good patient care even though it knows it won’t be paid.”

Richard Faherty (left), CEO, RLF Consulting LLC, and formerly with Bio-Reference Laboratories, Inc., will moderate this critical webinar. Joining him will be Rina Wolf (center), Vice President, Commercialization Strategies, Consulting and Industry Affairs, XIFIN, Inc., and Karen S. Lovitch (right), JD, Practice Leader, Health Law Practice, Mintz Levin, PC, Washington, DC. The webinar takes place Wednesday, December 6, 2017, at 2 p.m. EST; 1 p.m. CST; 12 p.m. MST; 11 a.m. PST. Click here to register. (Photo copyright: Dark Intelligence Group.)

Payers Checking on How Clinical Laboratories Bill, Collect from Patients

Faherty’s second trend involves how medical lab companies are billing and collecting the amounts due from patients. “Most payers now pay close attention to how clinical laboratories bill patients for co-pays, deductibles, and other out-of-pocket amounts that are required by the patients’ health plans,” he commented. “Labs struggle with this for two reasons.

“One reason is the fact that tens of millions of Americans currently have high-deductible health insurance plans,” said Faherty. “In these cases, medical laboratories often must collect 100% of the cost of lab testing directly from the patients. The second reason is the failure of many independent lab companies to properly and diligently balance-bill their patients. This puts these labs at risk of multiple fraud and abuse issues.”

Many Medical Lab Companies Undergoing More Rigorous Audits by Payers

Faherty considers trend number three to be payers’ expanding use of rigorous audits of lab test claims. “In the past, it was relatively uncommon for a clinical lab company or pathology group to undergo audits of their lab test claims,” he observed. “That has changed in a dramatic way. Today, the Medicare program has increased the number of private auditors that visit labs to inspect lab test claims. At the same time, private health insurers are ramping up the number and intensity of the audits they conduct of lab test claims and substantially increasing their demands for recoupment without audit.

“One consequence of these audits is that medical laboratories are being hit with substantial claims for recoupment,” noted Faherty. “I am aware of multiple genetic testing companies that have been hit with a Medicare recoupment amount equal to two or three years of the lab’s annual revenue. Some have filed bankruptcy because the appeals process can take three to four years.”

Are Contract Lab Sales Reps More Likely to Offer Physicians Inducements?

Faherty’s fourth significant trend involves the greater use of independent contractors that handle lab test sales and marketing for clinical lab companies. “This trend affects both labs that use third-party lab sales reps and labs that don’t,” he said. “Labs that use contract sales and marketing representatives do not have direct control over the sales practices of these contractors. There is ample evidence that some independent lab sales contractors are willing to pay inducements to physicians in exchange for their lab test referrals.

“This is a problem in two dimensions,” noted Faherty. “On one hand, clinical lab companies that use third-party sales contractors don’t have full control over the marketing practices of these sales representatives. Yet, if federal and state prosecutors can show violations of anti-kickback and self-referral laws, then the lab company is equally liable. In certain cases, government attorneys have even gone after executives on a personal basis.

“On the other hand, I am hearing lab executives complain now that a substantial number of office-based physicians are so used to various forms of inducement offered by third-party sales representatives that the lab’s in-house sales force cannot convince those physicians to use their lab company without a comparable inducement. If true, this is a fundamental shift in the competitive market for lab testing services and it puts labs unwilling to pay similar inducements to physicians at a disadvantage.”

These four trends describe the challenges faced by every clinical laboratory, hospital laboratory outreach program, and pathology group when attempting to provide lab testing services to office-based physicians in a fully-compliant manner and be paid adequately and on time by health insurers.

Why Some Labs Continue to Be Successful and What They Can Teach You

These four trends may also explain why many medical lab companies are dealing with falling revenue and encountering financial difficulty. However, there continue to be independent lab companies that have consistent success with their coding, billing, and collections effort. These labs put extra effort into aligning their business practices with the requirements of the Medicare program and private health insurers.

To help pathologists and managers running clinical laboratory companies, hospital lab outreach programs, and pathology groups improve collected revenue from lab test claims and to improve lab compliance, Pathology Webinars, LLC, is presenting a timely webinar, titled, “How to Prepare Your Lab for 2018: Essential Insights into New Payer Challenges with Lab Audits, Patient Billing, Out-of-Network Claims, and Heightened Scrutiny of Lab Sales Practices.” It takes place on Wednesday, December 6, 2017 at 2:00 PM EDT.

Three esteemed experts in the field will provide you with the inside scoop on the best responses and actions your clinical lab and pathology group can take to address these major changes and unwelcome developments. Presenting will be:

·       Rina Wolf, Vice President, Commercialization Strategies, Consulting and Industry Affairs, XIFIN, Inc. in San Diego; and,

·       Karen S. Lovitch, JD, Practice Leader, Health Law Practice, Mintz Levin, PC, in Washington, DC;

·       Moderating will be Richard Faherty of RLF Consulting LLC, and formerly with Bio-Reference Laboratories, Inc.

Special Webinar with Insights on How Your Lab Can Collect the Money It’s Due

To register for the webinar and see details about the topics to be discussed, use this link (or copy and paste this URL into your browser: http://pathologywebinars.com/how-to-prepare-your-lab-for-2018-essential-insights-into-new-payer-challenges-with-lab-audits-patient-billing-out-of-network-claims-and-heightened-scrutiny-of-lab-sales-practices/).

This is an essential webinar for any pathologist or lab manager wanting to improve collected revenue from lab test claims and to improve lab compliance. During the webinar, any single idea or action your lab can take away could result in increasing collected revenue by tens of thousands even hundreds of thousands of dollars. That makes this webinar the smartest investment you can make for your lab’s legal and billing/collection teams.

—Michael McBride

Related Information:

How to Prepare Your Lab for 2018: Essential Insights into New Payer Challenges with Lab Audits, Patient Billing, Out-of-Network Claims, and Heightened Scrutiny of Lab Sales Practices

Risk, Compliance, Pay—A Juggling Act for Labs

Continued ‘Aggressive Audit Tactics’ by Private Payers and Government Regulators Following 2018 Medicare Part B Price Cuts Will Strain Profitability of Clinical Laboratories, Pathology Groups

Threats to Profitability Causing Clinical Laboratories, Pathology Groups to Take on Added Risk by Entering into ‘Problematic’ Business Relationships and Risky Pricing Plans

Payers Hit Medical Laboratories with More and Tougher Audits: Why Even Highly-Compliant Clinical Labs and Pathology Groups Are at Risk of Unexpected Recoupment Demands

‘Death by 1,000 Knives’ Could Be in Store for Clinical Laboratories, Pathology Groups Not Prepared to Comply with New Medicare Part B Regulations

Up to 50% of Aetna, UnitedHealth Group, and Anthem Reimbursements Go to Value-Based Contracts; Clinical Laboratories Must Implement Value-Based Strategies to Remain Competitive

Aetna expects 75% to 80% of its medical spending will be value-based by 2020

Many pathologists and medical laboratory executives may be surprised to learn how quickly private health insurers are moving away from fee-for-service payment arrangements. According to Forbes, the nation’s largest health insurance companies now associate nearly 50% of reimbursements they make to value-based insurance initiatives.

This is a sign that value-based managed care contracting continues to gain momentum. And that interest remains strong in this form of reimbursement, which associates payment-for-care to quality and rewards efficient providers.

UnitedHealth Group (NYSE:UNH) and Aetna (NYSE:AET) are the fastest adopters of value-based payment models, with Anthem (NYSE:ANTM) close behind, the Forbes article noted.

Moreover, UnitedHealth and Aetna intend to increase their percentage of value-based contracts. For example, Aetna, which now ties 45% of its reimbursements to value, says its goal is to have 75% to 80% of its medical spending in value-based relationships by 2020, Healthcare Finance News pointed out.

These compelling data should motivate pathology groups and medical laboratory leaders to adopt strategies for value-based contracting. That’s because payment schemes based on clinical laboratory performance will likely grow quickly, as compared to traditional fee-for-service reimbursement models, which are being phased out.

Aetna: Lowering Acute Admits

Aetna and other insurance companies are rewarding in-network hospitals, medical laboratories, and physicians who help them keep their customers healthy.

“One way we measure our success is by how well we are able to keep our members out of the hospital and in their homes and communities,” stated Mark Bertolini, Aetna’s Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, in the Healthcare Finance News article.

“I think value-based contracting is going to continue to be encouraged by even the current [federal] administration as a way of getting a handle on healthcare costs,” he continued. In fact, Aetna lowered acute admissions by 4% in 2016 and reduced readmission rates by 27%, reported Healthcare Finance News.

UnitedHealth: Outpatient Care a Focal Point

Meanwhile, UnitedHealth Group spends $52 billion (or about 45%) of a $115 billion annual budget on value-based initiatives, Forbes noted.

In March, UnitedHealth Group joined Optum, its health services company, to Surgical Care Associates, an ambulatory (outpatient) surgery provider with 205 sites nationwide.

As surgical cases (such as total joint replacements) continue their migration to ambulatory surgery center sites, UnitedHealth Group expects this merger to offer value to patients, payers, and physicians, a statement pointed out.

“We’ve been able to drive down on a per capita basis inpatient, and inside that we’ve focused a lot in those early years around the conversion of inpatient to outpatient. And I think this is sort of the continued evolution as we focus more on the side of service to how do we get that outpatient into the ambulatory setting,” said Dan Schumacher, UnitedHealthcare Chief Financial Officer, in the Healthcare Finance News story.

 

The graphic above is from a slide presentation given by Eleanor Herriman, MD, MBA, Chief Medical Informatics Officer with Viewics, a provider of big-data management solutions for hospitals and clinical laboratories. Because of healthcare’s drive toward value-based payment models, clinical labs must focus on “operational efficiencies” and “testing utilization management,” and be prepared to “demonstrate value of testing to payers and health organizations,” Herriman’s presentation notes. (Image copyright: Viewics, Inc.)

Also, in 2016, OptumRx (pharmacy benefit management) announced partnerships with Walgreens and CVS Pharmacy. The joint pharmacy care agreements are intended to improve patient outcomes, connect platforms for health data leverage, and address costs of care, UnitedHealth Group stated in dual press releases (Walgreens and CVS) announcing the strategic partnerships.

Anthem: Planning for 50% Value-Based Care by Next Year

For its part, Anthem now has 43% of its operating budget focused on shared savings programs. Furthermore, the company reportedly has a plan to associate at least 50% of its budget with value-based care by 2018.

“When you combine this with our pay for performance programs, we will have well over half our spend in collaborative arrangements over the next five years,” Jill Becher, Anthem Staff Vice President of Communications, told Forbes.

Clinical Laboratories Need Value-Based Strategy

The rise of value-based care should motivate clinical laboratory leaders to create and implement novel and responsive strategies as soon as possible. Without a focus on value, labs could be denied entry into provider networks.

In a Clinical Laboratory Daily News article, Danielle Freedman, MD, noted that value-based clinical laboratory strategies could entail the following:

  • Working with physicians on appropriate retesting intervals;
  • Adding clinical decision support tools; and
  • Vetting testing requests.

Freedman is Director of Pathology at Luton and Dunstable University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust in the United Kingdom (UK).

Clinical laboratory executives and pathology practice administrators should take note of the fact that some large healthcare insurers already have nearly half of their reimbursement under value-based contracts, with plans to grow their investment in value-based relationships in the future.

Already facing the challenges of narrowing healthcare networks, it is imperative that lab leaders also get their lab team to focus on value (and not just volume). It can be expected that, as health insurers look to partner with labs in different regions and communities, they will want medical laboratories that are creative in developing high-value diagnostic testing services.

—Donna Marie Pocius

 

Related Information:

United Health, Aetna, Anthem Near 50% of Value-Based Care Spending

Aetna, UnitedHealth Show Increasing Appetite for Value-Based Care Contracts

Aetna Premier Care Network Plus Helps Reduce Costs for National Employers and Members Through Simple Access to Value-Based Care

Surgical Care Associates/OptumCare to Combine

OptumRx and Walgreens to Expand Consumer Choice, Reduce Costs, and Improve Health Outcomes

OptumRx and CVS Pharmacy to Expand Consumer Choice, Reduce Costs, and Improve Health Outcomes

“V” is for Value, Not Volume

Advanced Laboratory Analytics—A Disruptive Solution for Health Systems

 

McKinsey Reports That Consumers Will Find Fewer Options under the ACA in 2017 while Fewer Health Plans Means Less Access for Clinical Laboratories

Local medical labs and pathology groups are often excluded from narrow networks. Thus, another round of “network provider reduction” is a serious issue

Total enrollment in health insurance products may be increasing, but in its recently-issued study, McKinsey and Company determined that the Health Insurance Marketplace (Health Exchange) is shrinking even as the number of enrollees continues to rise.

The development is unfavorable to the nation’s clinical laboratories and pathology groups because fewer health plans on the exchange means less access to patients. It also means that the remaining health insurers are taking steps to further narrow their existing networks in order to curb expenses by limiting options.

The new report published by McKinsey and Company reveals that insurers are moving towards plans that offer fewer options for consumers, mostly due to losses suffered on the health exchanges. The report, titled, “2017 Exchange Market: Plan Type Trends,” states that in 2017 a majority of the healthcare plans (about 75%) available to consumers under the Affordable Care Act (ACA) will be Health Maintenance Organizations (HMOs) and other similar limited-option plans, such as Exclusive Provider Organizations (EPOs).

EPOs are a hybrid of HMOs and PPOs and share some common options from both. Of the states investigated, McKinsey found that about 15% of customers eligible for ACA exchanges will have no PPOs available to them. (more…)

Higher Deductibles and Co-Insurance Costs Squeezing Healthcare Consumers’ Wallets; A Reasons for Clinical Labs to Make Lab Test Prices Easy to See

Two new studies show patients are being increasingly burdened with a greater share of healthcare costs, which requires providers, including medical labs, to collect more money from patients at time of service

Although wage increases remain stagnant, consumers now pay a steadily increasing share of their healthcare costs. That’s because of rising deductibles, co-insurance, and other out-of-pocket costs. Not only will this cost-sharing trend continue to stretch patients’ budgets, it also will apply more pressure on clinical laboratories and pathology groups to increase price transparency for patients.

A recent study at the University of Michigan (UM), published in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), highlighted the growth in out-of-pocket insurance costs for hospitalized patients. For the average consumer with private health insurance, costs rose from $738 in 2009 to $1,013 in 2013—a 37% increase. During that same 4-year period, overall healthcare spending grew at 2.9% per year and health insurance premiums went up 5.1% annually.

Two types of health insurance plan charges were responsible for the biggest change in out-of-pocket spending: deductibles and co-insurance. During the same period, deductibles rose by 86%! Co-insurance costs increased 33% over the same period. Co-payments (a flat fee) were used in fewer hospitalizations. (more…)

Cleveland Clinic Gives Patients Statewide 24/7 Access to Physicians through Smartphones, iPads, Tablets and Online: Will Telemedicine Also Involve Pathologists?

New service allows patients statewide to access urgent care via telephones and other devices as Cleveland Clinic positions itself to be a 24/7 provider of choice

Urgent care by telephone is the latest patient-centric and customer-friendly medical service to be offered by the Cleveland Clinic. It is also the first 24-hour online statewide healthcare service of its kind in Ohio, a milestone that has implications for pathologists and clinical laboratory executives because lab testing is often required in support of patients wanting access to urgent care, particularly after hours.

Express Care Online (formerly MyCare Online) is the Cleveland Clinic’s new telemedicine service. It enables patients to see a medical professional for urgent matters via computer or smartphone 24 hours a day/seven days a week, according to a Cleveland Clinic statement. (more…)

;