2023 State of Healthcare Performance Improvement Report: Signs of Stabilization Emerge

Executive Summary

Hospitals and health systems are seeing some signs of stabilization in 2023 following an extremely difficult year in 2022. Workforce-related challenges persist, however, keeping costs high and contributing to issues with patient access to care. The percentage of respondents who report that they have run at less than full capacity at some time over the past year because of staffing shortages, for example, remains at 66%, unchanged from last year’s State of Healthcare Performance Improvement report. A solid majority of respondents (63%) are struggling to meet demand within their physician enterprise, with patient concerns or complaints about access to physician clinics increasing at approximately one-third (32%) of respondent organizations.

Most organizations are pursuing multiple strategies to recruit and retain staff. They recognize, however, that this is an issue that will take years to resolve—especially with respect to nursing staff—as an older generation of talent moves toward retirement and current educational pipelines fail to generate an adequate flow of new talent. One bright spot is utilization of contract labor, which is decreasing at almost two-thirds (60%) of respondent organizations.

Many of the organizations we interviewed have recovered from a year of negative or breakeven operating margins. But most foresee a slow climb back to the 3% to 4% operating margins that help ensure long-term sustainability, with adequate resources to make needed investments for the future. Difficulties with financial performance are reflected in the relatively high percentage of respondents (24%) who report that their organization has faced challenges with respect to debt covenants over the past year, and the even higher percentage (34%) who foresee challenges over the coming year. Interviews confirmed that some of these challenges were “near misses,” not an actual breach of covenants, but hitting key metrics such as days cash on hand and debt service coverage ratios remains a concern.

As in last year’s survey, an increased rate of claims denials has had the most significant impact on revenue cycle over the past year. Interviewees confirm that this is an issue across health plans, but it seems particularly acute in markets with a higher penetration of Medicare Advantage plans. A significant percentage of respondents also report a lower percentage of commercially insured patients (52%), an increase in bad debt and uncompensated care (50%), and a higher percentage of Medicaid patients (47%).

Supply chain issues are concentrated largely in distribution delays and raw product and sourcing availability. These issues are sometimes connected when difficulties sourcing raw materials result in distribution delays. The most common measures organizations are taking to mitigate these issues are defining approved vendor product substitutes (82%) and increasing inventory levels (57%). Also, as care delivery continues to migrate to outpatient settings, organizations are working to standardize supplies across their non-acute settings and align acute and non-acute ordering to the extent possible to secure volume discounts.

Survey Highlights

98% of respondents are pursuing one or more recruitment and retention strategies
90% have raised starting salaries or the minimum wage
73% report an increased rate of claims denials
71% are encountering distribution delays in their supply chain
70% are boarding patients in the emergency department or post-anesthesia care unit because of a lack of staffing or bed capacity
66% report that staffing shortages have required their organization to run at less than full capacity at some time over the past year
63% are struggling to meet demand for patient access to their physician enterprise
60% see decreasing utilization of contract labor at their organization
44% report that inpatient volumes remain below pre-pandemic levels
32% say that patients concerns or complaints about access to their physician enterprise are increasing
24% have encountered debt covenant challenges during the past 12 months
None of our respondents believe that their organization has fully optimized its use of the automation technologies in which it has already invested

Do insurers have a disincentive to help with transitions of care? 

https://mailchi.mp/b7baaa789e52/the-weekly-gist-september-29-2023?e=d1e747d2d8

A number of health systems have recently noted increasing financial challenges for Medicare Advantage (MA) patient admissions. 

One CFO shared, “our rates from MA plans are roughly on par with fee-for-service Medicare. Denials have always been a problem, making our [revenue] capture about 90 percent. But this year it’s dropped to 80 percent…it’s a crisis for us, given fast how MA volumes are growing.”

His team investigated the change and found the cause: mean length of stay for MA patients has jumped sharply. The rise was almost entirely due to difficulties in discharging patients to rehab and skilled nursing facilities. 

Key insurers have narrowed their postacute networks, resulting in patients spending days waiting for a bed. “The payers told us they had focused the network on ‘high-performing’ providers. Our data and doctors’ experiences say otherwise. They chose a handful of facilities that are cheap, with questionable quality,” their CMO reported. Attempts to engage payers to solve the problem have gone nowhere:

They have a disincentive to work with us on this. With case rates, they are saving money if patients are languishing in an expensive hospital bed rather than going to rehab.

This system is exploring expedited placement and expanding their portfolio of home-based care and postacute offerings, while even considering guaranteeing payment themselves. If you’re having similar challenges or have found solutions to help with transitions of care, we’d love to hear from you and learn more. 

Hospitals are in a world of denial

Hospital and insurer contract negotiations are often framed as an industry gauntlet, a defined period of time with an objective outcome where big talk does not translate to money. But reimbursement rates secured in new contracts are only one piece of hospitals’ payer-induced headaches.

Traditionally, a health system and commercial insurer would occasionally run into a wall in the contract negotiation process. This could play out into a dispute palpable enough to consumers that it warranted headlines. These impasses generally lasted a matter of weeks with no significant disruptions before outside pressure drove the parties to compromise. 

Over the past five years or so, the nature of provider-payer conflicts intensified and may be on the cusp of unprecedented severity given health systems’ financial pressures. At the same time, agreed-upon reimbursement rates are only the tip of the iceberg when it comes to payment health systems can expect from commercial insurers, who have many more defensive plays in their playbook. 

They boil down to a classic line from a 1968 movie: deny, deny, deny. 

Russ Johnson is CEO of LMH Health, a 102-year-old, independent, nonprofit health system based in Lawrence, Kan. The $350 million organization is anchored by a 174-bed hospital. As he puts it: “We’re not tiny, but we’re not very big.”

Mr. Johnson has spent 37 years working in healthcare, holding senior leadership positions in hospitals and health systems in rural communities and large cities. It’s difficult to identify many things going well when it comes to provider-payer relationships, but Mr. Johnson told Becker’s that it’s the payer movements beneath the reimbursement rates that are worsening and causing greater pain today.

“The part that’s getting worse is the practices behind and underneath the contracts — the sophistication and implementation of pay practices, information systems, artificial intelligence and computer algorithms that are just denying claims by the thousands every month,” he said.

The reimbursement rates secured in contracts are what you can see above water. Beneath, health insurers are moving faster and kicking harder. Throughout the first three months of 2023, about one-third of inpatient and outpatient claims submitted by providers to commercial payers went unpaid for more than 90 days, according to an analysis from Crowe. 

“So many more claims are now surfacing with some kind of a fallout on a denial, a downcoding or a pre-authorization — you know, the proverbial dotting the i’s and crossing the t’s, sometimes. But what is abundantly clear is it is not fundamentally about a clinical difference,” Mr. Johnson said. 

Denials were once reserved for a sliver of expensive treatments and have now become common occurrence for mundane, ordinary medical care and treatments such as inhalers or familiar medications for chronic conditions a patient has managed for years. The administrative burden is something close to a requirement to prove residency every month to receive electricity or verifying eligibility to work in the U.S. every week for a paycheck — redundant, time-wasting activity for ordinary, essential things. 

“For our business office to keep up with what I frankly think is mischief by the payers in terms of denials, pre-authorization, DRG downcoding and a completely unengaged experience trying to negotiate — or to have our physicians call in and do a peer-to-peer conferences about clinical necessity — it’s demoralizing, frankly,” Mr. Johnson said. “Dealing with denial from our payers is one of the biggest dissatisfiers our physicians face.”

Authors of the 2010 Affordable Care Act worried that provisions to expand health insurance access — such as barring health insurers’ refusal to cover patients with preexisting conditions — could cause them to ratchet up other tactics to make up for the change. With this in mind, the law charged HHS with monitoring health plan denial rates, but oversight has been unfulfilled, leaving denials widespread. 

Data and numbers on denial rates are not easy to find, but some examination paints a picture rich with variation. An analysis of 2021 plans on Healthcare.gov conducted by KFF found nearly 17 percent of in-network claims were denied, with rates varying from 2 percent to 49 percent. The reasons for the bulk of denials are unclear. About 14 percent were attributed to an excluded service, 8 percent to lack of pre-authorization or referral and 2 percent to questions of medical necessity. A whopping 77 percent were classified as “all other reasons.” 

Adding to the inconsistency is the fact that health plan denial rates fluctuate year over year. In 2020, a gold-level health plan offered by Oscar Insurance in Florida denied 66 percent of payment requests; in 2021 it denied 7 percent.

There is much to learn about the ways AI will shape healthcare, and its potential to further expedite and increase denials is concerning. Cigna faces a class-action lawsuit alleging it bypassed requirements for claim review before denial by having an algorithm — dubbed “PXDX” — complete review before having physicians sign off on batches of denied claims. The lawsuit followed a ProPublica report on the practice, which said Cigna physicians denied more than 300,000 claims over two months in 2022 through the system, which equated to 1.2 seconds of review per claim on average.

AI is often touted as a potential, looming replacement to hardworking healthcare professionals, but in the day to day it exacerbates the administrative burdens that already bring them down.  

“Nobody becomes a physician because they hope to feel like a cog in a factory,” Michael Ivy, MD, deputy chief medical officer of Yale New Haven (Conn.) Health, told Becker’s. “However, between meeting the demands of payers for referrals, denials of payment and increased documentation requirements in order to assure proper reimbursement and risk adjustment, as well as an increasing number of production metrics, it can be difficult not to feel like a cog.”

It’s Not Just You: Many Americans Face Insurance Obstacles Over Medical Care and Bills

https://www.yahoo.com/news/not-just-many-americans-face-115755833.html

A majority of Americans with health insurance said they had encountered obstacles to coverage, including denied medical care, higher bills and a dearth of doctors in their plans, according to a new survey from KFF, a nonprofit health research group. As a result, some people delayed or skipped treatment.

Those who were most likely to need medical care — people who described themselves as in fair or poor health — reported more trouble; three-fourths of those receiving mental health treatment experienced problems.

“The consequences of care delayed and missed altogether because of the sheer complexity of the system are significant, especially for people who are sick,” said Drew Altman, the CEO of KFF, formerly known as the Kaiser Family Foundation.

The survey also underscored the persistent problem of affordability as people struggled to pay their share of health care costs. About 40% of those surveyed said they had delayed or gone without care in the last year because of the expense. People in fair or poor health were more than twice as likely to report problems with paying medical bills than those in better health, and Black adults were more likely than white adults to indicate they had trouble.

Why It Matters: Delayed care can endanger health.

Nearly half of those who encountered a problem with their insurance said they could not satisfactorily resolve it. Some could not obtain the care they had sought, while others said they paid more than expected. Among the nearly 60% who reported difficulty with their insurance coverage, 15% said their health had declined.

“This survey shows it’s not enough to just get a card in your pocket — the insurance has to work or it’s not exactly coverage,” said Karen Pollitz, the co-director for KFF’s patient and consumer protections program.

People have a hard time understanding their coverage and benefits, with 30% or more reporting difficulty figuring out what they will be required to pay for care or what exactly their insurance will cover.

“Insurances are way more complicated than they should be,” said Amanda Parente, a 19-year-old college student in Nashville, Tennessee, who is covered under her mother’s employer plan. She was surprised to find that her out-of-pocket costs spiked recently when she sought treatment for strep throat. While she realized her copayments would be higher, “I guess we didn’t know how drastic it was going to be,” she said.

Background: Insurance coverage is confusing to everyone.

Navigating the intricacies of coverage and benefits were similar regardless of what kind of insurance people had. At least half of those surveyed with private coverage, through an employer, those with an “Obamacare” plan, or a government program like Medicare or Medicaid, said they experienced difficulties.

People might be unhappy with their coverage because they were already concerned about higher inflation and potential layoffs, said Christopher Lis, the managing director of global health care intelligence at J.D. Power, which found that consumer satisfaction with insurers had declined in a recent study. “We’ve got economic conditions that set the stage for concern around coverage and benefits,” he said.

Insurers say people generally report being happy with their plan, and 81% of those surveyed by KFF gave their insurance high ratings. “Health insurance providers are committed to improving access, affordability and convenience for all Americans and will continue to find innovative solutions to work toward this common goal,” said David Allen, a spokesperson for AHIP, a trade group that represents insurers.

What’s Next: How to haggle with insurers or appeal?

Also striking among the survey’s findings was how unaware people were about pursuing appeals of denied coverage and how to go about doing so.

“Most people don’t know who to call,” Pollitz said. Sixty percent of insured adults surveyed did not know they had a legal right to appeal, and about three-fourths said they did not know which government agency to contact for help, particularly respondents with private insurance.

State insurance regulators oversee fully insured policies sold to individuals and small businesses, and the federal Department of Labor has jurisdiction over employer-sponsored insurance.

Many of the problems people have with their insurance could be solved by enforcing existing rules, like federal regulations requiring private insurers to issue understandable explanations of benefits and to maintain accurate, current lists of doctors and hospitals within their networks.

UnitedHealthcare to require prior authorization for some colonoscopies

https://mailchi.mp/73102bc1514d/the-weekly-gist-may-19-2023?e=d1e747d2d8

Starting June 1, UnitedHealthcare will require physicians to submit prior authorization requests for certain types of colonoscopies. While routine screening colonoscopies will remain exempt, United beneficiaries requiring surveillance or diagnostic colonoscopies—which are performed on patients at greater risk of developing colon cancer or those already exhibiting worrisome symptoms—will need advance approval for the procedures to be covered by the payer. A UnitedHealthcare spokesperson said that this policy change is due to concerns that colonoscopy overutilization generates unnecessary medical risks and higher healthcare spending for patients.

The American College of Gastroenterology released a statement criticizing the new policy on the grounds that prior authorization requirements create harmful delays for patients and are a significant source of provider burnout.

The Gist: So much for the planned rollback of prior authorizations that UnitedHealthcare recently touted

While the insurer is not wrong in saying that some studies have documented overutilization of colonoscopies, 

prior authorization is a blunt tool that takes care decision making out of practicing providers’ hands, redirecting that power (along with more profit) to the payer. 

To process prior authorization requests in a timely manner, insurers now commonly rely on AI algorithms, which are an imperfect solution. For patients exhibiting signs of colon cancer, improper denials and delayed approvals for colonoscopies could have life-threatening implications.

AMA president details ‘Kafkaesque’ prior authorization process

American Medical Association President Jack Resneck Jr., MD, detailed in a post on the medical group’s website the “Kafkaesque” prior authorization process that an unnamed insurance company allegedly put one of his patients through. 

Dr. Resneck, a San Francisco-based dermatologist, was treating a patient with severe head-to-toe eczema, who was unable to sleep because of the condition, according to the post. Dr. Resneck found a medication that allowed the patient to sleep and return to work. 

Several months later, however, the patient was unable to get the prescription refilled at the pharmacy, according to the report. Dr. Resneck completed the paperwork describing how well the patient had responded to the medication, as required by the insurance company, and faxed it over. The prior authorization request for the prescription refill was rejected. 

Dr. Resneck said the insurance company rejected the refill on the grounds that the patient no longer met the severity criteria because not enough of his body was covered and he was not missing enough sleep. 

The insurance company allegedly wanted to take the patient off the medication for several weeks to let his eczema flare up again, according to the post. It took more than 20 additional telephone calls until the patient’s prescription was refilled.

5 questions Medicare Advantage data doesn’t answer

https://www.beckerspayer.com/payer/5-questions-medicare-advantage-data-doesnt-answer.html

A lack of data about Medicare Advantage plans means there are several unanswered questions about the program, according to an analysis from Kaiser Family Foundation. 

The analysis, published April 25, breaks down the kinds of Medicare Advantage data not publicly available. Some missing data is not collected from insurers by CMS, and some data is collected by the agency but not available to the public. 

Here are five questions researchers can’t answer without more data, according to Kaiser Family Foundation: 

  1. Insurers are not required to report how many enrollees use supplemental benefits and if members incur out-of-pocket costs with their supplemental benefits. Without this data, researchers can’t answer what share of enrollees use their supplemental benefits, how much members spend out of pocket for supplemental benefits, and if these benefits are working to achieve better health outcomes. 
  2. CMS does not require Medicare Advantage plans to report prior authorizations by type of service. Without more granular data, researchers can’t determine which services have the highest rates of denial and if prior authorization rates vary across insurers and plans. 
  3. Insurers are also not required to report the reasons for prior authorization denials to CMS. This leaves unanswered questions, including what is the most common reason for denials and if rates of denials vary across demographics. 
  4. Medicare Advantage plans do not report complete data on denied claims for services already provided. Without this data, researchers cannot determine how often payers deny claims for Medicare-covered services and reasons why these claims are denied. 
  5. CMS does not publish the names of employers or unions that receive Medicare funds to provide Medicare Advantage plans to retired employees. Without more data, researchers can’t tell which industries use Medicare Advantage most often and how rebates vary across employers.

CMS softened proposed rate changes, but strengthened prior authorization rules for MA plans

https://mailchi.mp/c9e26ad7702a/the-weekly-gist-april-7-2023?e=d1e747d2d8

Last Friday, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) announced that it will begin phasing in major Medicare Advantage (MA) risk-adjustment changes over a three-year period, slower than previously anticipated. Thanks to this delay in full implementation, MA plans will see an average 3.3 percent payment increase in 2024, up from the one percent projected in the earlier draft notice.

CMS also finalized regulations this week that aim to limit MA prior authorizations and denials by requiring that coverage decisions align with traditional Medicare.

The Gist: After CMS began proposing changes to MA payment formulas last year, aimed at reining in pervasive abuses and fraud, 

the insurance industry responded with a $13M marketing blitz to oppose the changes. 

The ads, one of which aired during the Super Bowl, tied Medicare Advantage “cuts” to the time-tested “Hands Off My Medicare” messaging directed at seniors. 

With MA enrollment projected to overtake traditional Medicare this year, the federal government finds itself walking a tightrope in clamping down on overpayments to MA plans, given that any reductions will impact a growing number of seniors.

Increasing denials, unfavorable payer mix among top RCM concerns: report

Revenue cycle challenges “seem to have intensified over the past year,” according to Kaufman Hall’s “2022 State of Healthcare Performance Improvement” report, released Oct. 18. 

The consulting firm said that in 2021, 25 percent of survey respondents said they had not seen any pandemic-related effects on their respective revenue cycles. This year, only 7 percent said they saw no effects. 

The findings in Kaufman Hall’s report are based on survey responses from 86 hospital and health system leaders across the U.S.

Here are the top five ways leaders said the pandemic affected the revenue cycle in 2022:

1. Increased rate claim denials — 67 percent

2. Change in payer mix: Lower percentage of commercially insured patients — 51 percent

3. Increase in bad debt/uncompensated care — 41 percent

4. Change in payer mix: Higher percentage of Medicaid patients — 35 percent

5. Change in payer mix: Higher percentage of self-pay or uninsured patients — 31 percent