• 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
    • Tech Talk
    • 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
  • TRIO Resources
    • Triological Society
    • The Laryngoscope
    • Laryngoscope Investigative Otolaryngology
    • TRIO Combined Sections Meetings
    • COSM
    • Related Otolaryngology Events
  • Search

The Opt-Outs: Otolaryngologists extol the benefits of third-party independence

by RIchard Quinn • September 3, 2010

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

Dr. Asher, who sets aside office time each month for patients who can’t afford his full fare, added: “If I’m setting up an office that is totally out of network, I believe the services I have to offer are of value. I don’t want that to be an exclusive for people who have money.”

You Might Also Like

  • AMA’s Opt-Out Provision for Sale of Physician Prescribing Data Seen as First Step
  • Getting out of the Insurance Game
  • Situation Critical: Otolaryngologists See Diminishing Returns for Taking Emergency Call
  • When Dealing with Insurers, Electronic Payment Tools May be an Otolaryngologist’s Best Friend
Explore This Issue
September 2010

THE REFORM FACTOR

The wild card in how many otolaryngologists and other specialists consider moving to third-party-free practices is the uncertainty about how exactly health care reform will impact reimbursements. AAPS, which has sued the government to fight the law’s implementation, hopes more doctors move toward fee-for-service payment as they battle what Dr. Orient calls “ever more onerous and costly” requirements for record keeping and the potential for longer office waiting times as more people with insurance make appointments.

“In some ways, it will help my practice, because with the general lowering of reimbursement you will see physicians spending less and less time with patients and missing more and more things,” Dr. Gianoli said. “By comparison, the physician who charges a reasonable price and works for [the] patients, spending adequate time with [them], and practices good medicine will look like [a] superstar.”

Another potential hurdle in the future is how health coverage plans deal with reimbursement for out-of-network services. After Dr. Gianoli’s patients pay him at the time a service is rendered, they are free to seek some level of compensation from their insurance plans. Should the influx of newly-insured patients push carriers to lower or even eliminate out-of-network reimbursement eventually, patients might decide they can no longer afford to purchase that level of care, Dr. Gianoli added.

“That’s the beauty of the model. There’s always room for charity in a clinic like this ”
—Michael J. A. Robb, MD

THE BOTTOM LINE

Dr. Robb said another benefit of not accepting insurance is that overhead is dramatically reduced since the provider doesn’t need to hire multiple staffers whose primary function is to “haggle and fight with agents and push paper.” There is, however, the issue of the up-front costs involved in starting a practice that relies on reimbursement from insurance companies. Dr. Robb estimated that when he started his practice he saved $50,000 to $150,000 of the start-up debt associated with practices accepting in-network payments, such as buying computers and software to comply with mandates regarding electronic medical records and billing.

Dr. Gianoli said a key to running the financial aspect of a third-party-free practice is to charge “reasonable fees.” His practice, run with partner James S. Soileau, MD, gradually eliminated its insurance contracts, starting in 2001. By the time the practice eliminated the last carrier, cash customers already comprised the majority of the business, but the bottom line required that the fees stay competitive. Boiled down, Dr. Gianoli said, out-of-network physicians can charge $2 for a service for which an in-network physician charges $5. This is because the physician outside of insurance collects all of the money he or she charges. The in-network provider may collect only $1 of the $5.

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 | Single Page

Filed Under: Departments, Health Policy, Practice Management Tagged With: billing and coding, healthcare reform, insurance, legal, malpractice, Medicare, opt-out, practice management, reimbursement, third-partyIssue: September 2010

You Might Also Like:

  • AMA’s Opt-Out Provision for Sale of Physician Prescribing Data Seen as First Step
  • Getting out of the Insurance Game
  • Situation Critical: Otolaryngologists See Diminishing Returns for Taking Emergency Call
  • When Dealing with Insurers, Electronic Payment Tools May be an Otolaryngologist’s Best Friend

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

Would you choose a concierge physician as your PCP?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...
  • Polls Archive

Top Articles for Residents

  • Applications Open for Resident Members of ENTtoday Edit Board
  • How To Provide Helpful Feedback To Residents
  • Call for Resident Bowl Questions
  • New Standardized Otolaryngology Curriculum Launching July 1 Should Be Valuable Resource For Physicians Around The World
  • Do Training Programs Give Otolaryngology Residents the Necessary Tools to Do Productive Research?
  • Popular this Week
  • Most Popular
  • Most Recent
    • A Journey Through Pay Inequity: A Physician’s Firsthand Account

    • The Dramatic Rise in Tongue Tie and Lip Tie Treatment

    • Otolaryngologists Are Still Debating the Effectiveness of Tongue Tie Treatment

    • Is Middle Ear Pressure Affected by Continuous Positive Airway Pressure Use?

    • 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

    • Complications for When Physicians Change a Maiden Name

    • Excitement Around Gene Therapy for Hearing Restoration
    • “Small” Acts of Kindness
    • How To: Endoscopic Total Maxillectomy Without Facial Skin Incision
    • Science Communities Must Speak Out When Policies Threaten Health and Safety
    • Observation Most Cost-Effective in Addressing AECRS in Absence of Bacterial Infection

Follow Us

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

Wiley

Copyright © 2025 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