• Home
  • Practice Focus
    • Facial Plastic/Reconstructive
    • Head and Neck
    • Laryngology
    • Otology/Neurotology
    • Pediatric
    • Rhinology
    • Sleep Medicine
    • How I Do It
    • TRIO Best Practices
  • Business of Medicine
    • Health Policy
    • Legal Matters
    • Practice Management
    • Technology
    • AI
  • Literature Reviews
    • Facial Plastic/Reconstructive
    • Head and Neck
    • Laryngology
    • Otology/Neurotology
    • Pediatric
    • Rhinology
    • Sleep Medicine
  • Career
    • Medical Education
    • Professional Development
    • Resident Focus
  • ENT Perspectives
    • ENT Expressions
    • Everyday Ethics
    • From TRIO
    • The Great Debate
    • Letter From the Editor
    • Rx: Wellness
    • The Voice
    • Viewpoint
    • SUO Corner
  • TRIO Resources
    • Triological Society
    • The Laryngoscope
    • Laryngoscope Investigative Otolaryngology
    • TRIO Combined Sections Meetings
    • COSM
    • Related Otolaryngology Events
  • Home
  • Practice Focus
    • Facial Plastic/Reconstructive
    • Head and Neck
    • Laryngology
    • Otology/Neurotology
    • Pediatric
    • Rhinology
    • Sleep Medicine
    • How I Do It
    • TRIO Best Practices
  • Business of Medicine
    • Health Policy
    • Legal Matters
    • Practice Management
    • Technology
    • AI
  • Literature Reviews
    • Facial Plastic/Reconstructive
    • Head and Neck
    • Laryngology
    • Otology/Neurotology
    • Pediatric
    • Rhinology
    • Sleep Medicine
  • Career
    • Medical Education
    • Professional Development
    • Resident Focus
  • ENT Perspectives
    • ENT Expressions
    • Everyday Ethics
    • From TRIO
    • The Great Debate
    • Letter From the Editor
    • Rx: Wellness
    • The Voice
    • Viewpoint
    • SUO Corner
  • TRIO Resources
    • Triological Society
    • The Laryngoscope
    • Laryngoscope Investigative Otolaryngology
    • TRIO Combined Sections Meetings
    • COSM
    • Related Otolaryngology Events
  • Search

When Dealing with Insurers, Electronic Payment Tools May be an Otolaryngologist’s Best Friend

by Sue Pondrom • September 1, 2006

  • Tweet
  • Email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
Print-Friendly Version

The business side of medical practice can sometimes be a bigger challenge than ferreting out a difficult diagnosis. Inflation-adjusted physician income has declined about 7% since 1995, according to a June 2006 study by the Center for Studying Health System Change. Flat or declining fees from both public and private payers are cited as a primary factor. Add to that excessive payment delays and too-frequent denials from insurance companies, and the business of practicing medicine continues to frustrate doctors.

You Might Also Like

  • Medicare Meltdown: Congress Seeks Payment Formula Fix
  • Audit Agony: Prepare yourself as insurers look to recoup funds
  • Payment Limbo: Medical societies take on SGR reform
  • The Opt-Outs: Otolaryngologists extol the benefits of third-party independence
Explore This Issue
September 2006

On the other hand, there may be an electronic light at the end of the financial tunnel. More physicians-otolaryngologists-head and neck surgeons included-are utilizing electronic billing systems, resulting in faster payments and fewer denials.

A May 2006 study by America’s Health Insurance Plans (AHIP), a national association of health insurers, indicates that three-quarters of all health insurance claims are now submitted electronically, up from 24% in 1995, allowing 98 percent of claims to be processed within a month of receipt from the health-care provider, the AHIP said. Further, the study found that insurers now process a majority of claims within a week of receipt.

Many Variations in Claims Processing

Another May 2006 survey has ranked insurance carriers by their payment speeds, denial rates, adherence to national standards, and more. Called PayerView (available online at www.athenapayerview.com ), this survey by athenahealth, a provider of physician services including outsourced billing, analyzed claim performance data from more than 7,000 providers during the last quarter in 2005. Among its findings:

Some insurance companies don’t pay well and we know that. It’s not rocket science; it’s just practical experience. – -Lee Eisenberg, MD

  • National carrier Aetna denies claims twice as often as the top performer, Humana.
  • Cigna led all carriers in the category that measures the percentage of claims found to be not on file at the payer after inquiry by the physician.
  • Wellpoint was the most aggressive shifter of responsibility to physicians to secure payment from patients directly.
  • The average number of days a claim is in accounts receivable among national payers is 38.

In a press release announcing the survey, athenahealth co-founder and CEO Jonathan Bush claims that by making these rankings publicly available, we hope to illustrate the significance and scope of this national problem, help insurers recognize the source of process breakdown, and work to improve their reimbursement practices for everyone involved.

Otolaryngologists Skeptical

However, physicians interviewed for this article weren’t too sure the PayerView survey would have much impact on the performance of insurance companies.

Pages: 1 2 3 4 | Single Page

Filed Under: Departments, Health Policy, Practice Management, Tech Talk Tagged With: billing and coding, electronic billing, finance, healthcare reform, insurance, Medicare, policy, reimbursement, technologyIssue: September 2006

You Might Also Like:

  • Medicare Meltdown: Congress Seeks Payment Formula Fix
  • Audit Agony: Prepare yourself as insurers look to recoup funds
  • Payment Limbo: Medical societies take on SGR reform
  • The Opt-Outs: Otolaryngologists extol the benefits of third-party independence

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

The Triological SocietyENTtoday is a publication of The Triological Society.

Polls

More and more medical trainees are taking dedicated, prolonged gap years. Did you?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...
  • Polls Archive

Top Articles for Residents

  • Is the SLOR in Otolaryngology Residency Applications Contributing to Rural Disparities?
  • Applications Open for Resident Members of the ENTtoday Editorial Board
  • A Resident’s View of AI in Otolaryngology
  • Call for Resident Bowl Questions
  • Resident Pearls: Pediatric Otolaryngologists Share Tips for Safer, Smarter Tonsillectomies
  • Popular this Week
  • Most Popular
  • Most Recent
    • Office Laryngoscopy Is Not Aerosol Generating When Evaluated by Optical Particle Sizer
    • Some Laryngopharyngeal Reflux Resists PPI Treatment
    • Top 10 LARY and LIO Articles of 2024
    • Empty Nose Syndrome: Physiological, Psychological, or Perhaps a Little of Both?
    • Rating Laryngopharyngeal Reflux Severity: How Do Two Common Instruments Compare?
    • The Dramatic Rise in Tongue Tie and Lip Tie Treatment
    • Rating Laryngopharyngeal Reflux Severity: How Do Two Common Instruments Compare?
    • Is Middle Ear Pressure Affected by Continuous Positive Airway Pressure Use?
    • Otolaryngologists Are Still Debating the Effectiveness of Tongue Tie Treatment
    • Keeping Watch for Skin Cancers on the Head and Neck
    • Short-Term Efficacy of Biologics in Recalcitrant AFRS: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
    • The Devaluation of Otolaryngology: An Evaluation of CMS’s Involvement in Physician Reimbursement
    • Embolized Middle Meningeal Artery as a Surgical Landmark in Infratemporal Fossa
    • Lord of the (Magnetic) Rings: Rigid Bronchoscopy for Aspirated Magnetic Foreign Bodies in Tertiary Bronchi
    • What Otolaryngologists Can Learn from Athletes

Follow Us

  • Contact Us
  • About Us
  • Advertise
  • The Triological Society
  • The Laryngoscope
  • Laryngoscope Investigative Otolaryngology
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Use
  • Cookies

Wiley

Copyright © 2026 by John Wiley & Sons, Inc. All rights reserved, including rights for text and data mining and training of artificial technologies or similar technologies. ISSN 1559-4939