I I really do not know the figures now as the Kaiser information is at least a year old. It broke each state down and gave the percentage of total doctors who accepted Medicaid patients per state. Wyoming had the highest rate at 99% of their doctors and New Jersey the lowest rate at only 40%. But like anything else the information is misleading even if 100% correct. They had another article I have been searching for, I didn't save it for some unknown reason. The rate for family doctors and GP's is much higher than for specialty's. The rate specialty doctors, like heart, lung, neurology field, surgeons doctors accept Medicaid patients is much, much lower. The reason is exactly as you stated. They lose money on each and every Medicaid patient they see. Then their is the extra long wait for reimbursement and extra paperwork. A lot of these so called new Medicaid patients now will have insurance, but still no doctor to see. Expanding Medicaid without fixing it is just a feel good exercise for those who support it. You are putting more and more people into a system in which there is not enough doctors to handle them.
I thought you claimed to be a doctor. Now we find out you are in Medical Payments and Administration? Which is it?
Realistically if the system is ever really going to be solvent rationing care is going to have to be a reality. It can be rationed by the patients ability to pay his own bills or it can be rationed by a cost/benefit analysis. But if anyone actually thinks that a,system of unlimited healthcare availability is compatible with our Capatilist society is just kidding themselves. There is no other aspect of our society where we cive everyone everything thay want regardless of ability to pay.
Are you sure the real reason isn't thet they just make more money treating other patients. In other words basic greed just like any other profession.
That is what Kaiser and the NYT's reported. It seems medicare reimbursement rate is 80% of the the approved amount with what ever secondary insurance one has if one has it to make up the difference. Medicaid reimbursement rate if I remember right was pegged at 60% of the approved rate and those folks have no secondary insurance to pick up the remaining amount. But that reimbursement rate varies by state.
It isn't greed. Who can provide a service for a fee that doesn't allow them a profit? No business. The less and less Medicare and Medicaid reimburse and fail to increase reimbursements to account for higher operating and regulating costs, the fewer doctors will be able to continue to see their Medicare and Medicaid patients. Are Lawyers greedy, charging by the minute for their services, taking cases on contingency and if they win they get more money than their client? How about accountants that also bill by the hour? How about the fact that a plumber or electrician earns more on weekends for their services than a surgeon earns to amputate a foot and give free post-op care for 3 months as required by Medicare and Medicaid? How about the fact that Medicare Reimbursement hasn't increased in the past 10 years, remained the same, ignoring the yearly rising costs to provide treatment. You are so wrong it makes my blood pressure rise.
Well then it would be useful if you could demonstrate that I am actually wrong.. Just giving your opinion may provide a needed catharsis but doesn't actually do anything to disprove my statement.
I think I already have done that. Greed isn't charging enough to cover your the cost of your services and make a profit, is it? And if you believe you or the State or Federal Government has a right to define each and every maximum profit a business or service can earn, then we have a lot of laws to change. Because, Lawyers, Accountants, Plumber, Electricians, Home Builders and on and on can clearly determine their profit without any Government regulation or intrusion. Fair is fair. When the Supreme Court rules that the U.S. Government and State Governments have the right to regulate all fees for services, across the board, limiting the fees a private health care provider can charge should be included. Until then, they can charge anything they want and it is up to you the consumer to chose who you want to seek care from.
No you haven't done that. You never provide any data or evidence except your opinion which you fail to validate by posting you actual credentials.
You simply refuse to understand that it would only be greed if providers where charging way more than necessary to cover their costs and make them a profit commensurate with their education and experience. You don't resultsa study to from a study to prove that. I am tired of your persistent need for "evidence". Can you simply rely on commonsense. Doubt that you can because it is a foreign concept to radical liberals. Here are the results of my study'; when a provider is paid less than it costs them to provide care they are likely to no longer be willing to provide that care. Duh. And by the way I have taught medical management, medical transcription, human anatomy. As an instructor, I teach facts based on my experience and education. Not based on biased, unproven, often non-scientific studies. Whats your education and experience on the subject?
Requiring data rather than opinions is usually considered the basis for intelligent discussion of issues. So you have taught typing and anatomy and filing. Hardly qualifications for an expert on the medical profession. And I note you don't tell us what your current position is. Is it with a major hospital and what exactly is your position. If you are going to pretend expert status in the medical system in Amarica you are going to have to do a lot better than that. And experts in any field rarely rely on common sense as a substitute for knowledge. As for my qualification. I have been an uninsured consumer who has negotiated with doctors and hospitals for years as required because of a pre-existing condition. Have met with countless Adminstrators and Billing depts in efforts to get my costs down to the same costs as charged to major insurance companies. Been to India for three rounds of surgeries which gives me at least a first hand observation of a system outside the US. As for data I usually rely either on government studies, or the Mecical professions own studies or data from organizations like Pew Trust. I don't rely on on common sense or my own opinions . I rely on data and facts which can be easily found on the Internet with very little effort.
ACA is a proven success saving thousands of lives and billions of dollars. And the best part of all - contrary to the wishes of the far right, ACA IS HERE TO STAY!
No, it qualifies me as an expert on health information management, medical management and I do have a degree in medical information management. Plus experience at all levels of medical management. So I would guess I know far more than the average person when it comes to Health Insurance, filing health insurance claims, disputing incorrect payment of claims and most important, the reforms that were needed to improve our health insurance system. See, you continue to fail to understand that health care is a separate issue from health insurance. And, these two issues should have been addressed separately with two separate acts by Congress. Improving Health Care should have been addressed by reforms to the Medicare and Medicaid system as these two programs needed huge reforms.
Not exactly sure how having a background in health information management gives you any credibility as an expert on the ACA , particularly given the number of incorrect statements you have made about the provisions of the law. And we all understand the difference between health insurance and health care management. And the data is uncontravertable that the US system of health care is the most expensive in the developed world while delivering inferior results by almost every measurable criteria.
I'm just an ordinary citizen, disabled and in Medicaid, I just know a lot of us need help. We need medical professionals and drugs and treatments to be affordable so we can get access to them and I don't understand how Physicians who are in the traditional role of healers can refuse care of the poor because of our social class. I don't understand how a my insulin which is broadly used and needed costs over $200 a vial, you would think the demand would drive up production and reduce prices. If the system is to complex for someone like me to navigate its a problem in France a friend of mine I met there has all her information on one ID card, she shows it and she gets care, paid for by taxes they don't make it hard for her to get care but I have to worry and deal with all this complex information and sometimes screw up. The ACA didn't help with anything oddly I see as the problems in the system.
Right wingers said ACa would kill jobs. But it didn't: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/...less-claims-fall-to-lowest-level-in-40-years# Instead, it saved jobs, money, and lives.
Sorry I meant not a problem for my friend in France I have more issues but the system is still manageable I also just show my card and pay nothing for my Medicaid care, but do have to deal with my HMO but its not perfect its lower stress than the CA apparently causes with its really wacky system.
http://www.healthline.com/health-news/obamacare-is-a-success-researchers-say-072815 Obamacare Is a Success, Researchers Say Written by Brian Krans | Published on July 28, 2015 The Affordable Care Act appears to be positively affecting the health of a nation, a new study concludes. patriotic success
I just want to thank Obama for finally attacking unions. They had it coming for their blind faith in the left wing nuts. http://www.modernhealthcare.com/article/20150302/NEWS/150309985
Because it is the Health Information Manager and Hospital management that are responsible for processing insurance claims. We have to know all aspects and regulations of the ACA in order to do this and comply with all of the new regulations. We are the ones that verify a patients insurance, get pre-authorization for surgical procedures, inpatient admission and virtually all other coverage for the treatment the patient requires. We verify if their deductible is met, what their co-pay is and what their out of pocket is. We reprocess inaccurately paid medicare and Medicaid and private insurance claims, we assist the physician or hospital when claims are denied. We bill the patient for their portion of the bill and assist them when their insurance company denies previously authorized charges. What else do you want to know? The information I provided regarding the ACA both prior to its passage and after has been factual and can be verified by reading the ACT. Give one example of what I have stated is not provided in the PPACA.
In the opinion issued June 25, Chief Justice John Roberts said the law “grew out of a long history of failed health insurance reform” that led to more Americans without health insurance. Well IMO, that is simply not true, as there had been little attempt to reform Health Insurance. It was for several decades the only insurance not regulated under the Sherman Act and other laws meant to regulate the insurance industry. The Federal and State Governments simply allowed them card blanche. We needed regulation and reform and I fought for it during my 35+ plus years in the industry. Lack of jobs, lack of regulation is what led to high premiums and an increase in the number of Americans without health insurance. The ACA didn't go far enough in regulating the Private Insurance Companies, it promises "bail-out" if the Exchange policies they offer lose money. It failed to regulate premiums and require full transperancy regarding the cost of each benefit provided for in the policy. Covered treatment, in network physicians, clinics, hospitals. Regulated annual premium increases. And so much more.
I do not disagree, I would of much rather seen Obama's pubic option then the conservatives individual mandate .
I would have rather restored medical care to the free market system. But, my husband, surgeon, is close to retirement and we both are close to being on Medicare; so personally I don't give a "d" anymore. Universal health care will mean fewer doctors entering the profession, doctors that likely will go to work for 8 hours a day with little incentive to go above and beyond as they will simply become an employee of the federal government, collecting a check regardless of the quality of the care they provide. There will be good doctors and those that simply collect their check. The Government will own the entire health care system. Based on their ability to properly manage the V.A. Hospital system and Medicare; I can't put much faith in the quality of the Universal Health Care system they will manage.
