Mar
4

Heading to WCRI – practice “safe conferencing”

Don’t be offended if handshakes aren’t offered and hugs avoided…it’s all part of “safe conferencing”, my name for the guidelines posted by the fine folk at WCRI.

Things kick off tomorrow, but most are getting in this afternoon – me included. I’m looking forward to the discussion of economic cycles and their impact on the labor market. Economists have been predicting a significant slowdown in growth for months and things are looking shakier due to the coronavirus’ impact on travel and supply chains. 

Here’s an excellent piece by one of the best news sources – The Economist – on how things will be different in the next recession than in past versions, and why.

And another from the Wharton School on the virus, how business is reacting to it’s many effects, and thoughts about long-term impact(s).

(I’ll be posting on this issue next week)

Got dinners, lunches, and breakfasts all confirmed, along with a cocktail catch-up or three.

Good to see colleagues aren’t over-reacting to the coronavirus thing.  Yes it’s a concern, but it is not a reason to stay home.

 


Mar
2

Coronavirus, Monday update

Until things calm down we’ll do an occasional post on the biggest health story out there – coronavirus.

Thanks to Larry – here’s the latest numbers (as of 10 am EST 3-2-20) on cases, recoveries, and mortalities by nation. Source link here.

Note that all views/opinions/takes are based on what we know nowwhich will change as time goes on.

First, how afraid should you be?

Quick take – it’s worse than the flu, but way less dangerous than other diseases.

This isn’t Ebola – which has an 80% death rate.  It’s not MERS (death rate of 34.7%) or the plague (death rate of 15% if patients are effectively treated).

Based on very incomplete data, it looks like the death rate is equal to or less than the Spanish Flu – somewhere less than 2 percent. No question – that is a relatively high death rate – but it is based on very preliminary data.

Here’s a datapoint – in the US 18,000 people have died from the flu in the current flu season – and over 300,000 have been hospitalized.

So far, logic says you should be a heckuva lot more afraid of the regular flu.

More to the point, it appears those with compromised respiratory systems, or in poor health, or with other serious health problems are at much higher risk than healthier folks.

BUT – and it’s a big but – that mortality rate may be much lower, because:

  • a significant percentage of people that test positive for corona don’t have any symptoms
  • tests  – especially the one initially used in the US – weren’t very accurate

How contagious is it?

Probably about the same as a “regular” flu; again initial reports indicate corona is more contagious, but that may be because it was a brand new disease, wasn’t managed well at the outset, and started in a very densely populated area.

What are the symptoms?

Initially, fever and a cough; some victims go on to contact pneumonia.

Will corona go away when it gets warmer?

We have no idea. There is no scientific basis for President Trump’s claim that warmer weather will end the epidemic; this is a brand new virus and no one has any idea if or how it will be affected by weather.

Lastly – be very careful about information sources.

The World Health Organization is the best I’ve seen.

One that pops up at the top of google searches is RT. RT is funded, staffed, and written by the Russian government.  RT highly exaggerates death rates, here’s one example: RESEARCHERS DISCOVER MERS HAS A 65% FATALITY RATE

This is categorically false.

To date, White House announcements about corona haven’t been much better. White House statements have downplayed the risk of corona, the number of cases, how fast it is spreading, and claimed the flu’s death rate is the same as corona (it isn’t; so far corona looks to be 14 – 20 times more deadly than the flu).

What does this mean for you?

Science is important.

 


Feb
26

Coronavirus Part One, the Bad News and the Good.

Just chill.

Several readers have suggested I post on the coronavirus issue and how it relates to workers’ comp.

My quick takeaway – it’s highly unlikely coronavirus will be contained – but the death rate (percentage of people who die from it) will be pretty low.

Now, where things stand today.

First, there’s little hard, irrefutable evidence about coronavirus.

It’s so new that scientists and epidemiologists (scientists who study the spread of disease) don’t have any historical data to study. So, we do not know a lot – and much of what you hear is based on pretty sketchy information.

Second – do NOT just read the headlines; this one is a great example.

StatNews is a very credible source, but even here the headline “New data from China buttress fears about high coronavirus fatality rate, WHO expert says” is misleading.

While one expert avers that the mortality rate is relatively high, other experts refute that assertion, noting there just isn’t enough data to draw any credible conclusions.

Moreover, even in China the mortality rate varies greatly, with the death rate among those infected in the province where the virus originated 3 to 6 times higher than outside that province.

I get this is confusing and frustrating and scary – but it’s critical that we read objectively and question declarative statements especially those from people who aren’t scientists. [that includes me, dear readers]

Example – yesterday the Secretary of Homeland Security said the death rate from coronavirus and the flu is the same – 2 percent. That’s flat-out wrong; the worst case estimate for coronavirus’ death rate is around 2%; that’s 20 times higher than the flu death rate (0.01% – one out of 10,000).

Third, it appears – at this moment – that the corona virus is much less deadly than the worst strains we’ve seen in the past.  [please refer back to #1 above…]

Reality is, flu-type diseases that are really deadly don’t spread very fast because infected people die pretty quickly – which means they don’t infect many others. You may remember the deadliest one in memory – the avian flu. It killed more than half the people infected, yet only 455 people died.

Remember SARS and MERS?  They are different strains of coronavirus than the current one, and quite deadly. Yet less than 1000 people died from each of these strains.

Fourth, some people infected with the virus don’t have any symptoms. 

This isn’t surprising, as about 1 of every 7 people who have a “regular” flu are also asymptomatic.  It also supports #3 above. But that’s also why it’s so hard to contain coronavirus – a bunch of infected people are walking around undiagnosed, spreading the virus to others.

Fifth, there will NOT be a vaccine for at least a year.

And likely longer than that. Vaccine development is tricky, frustrating, and marked with lots of false starts and stops and dead ends. And vaccine safety is a critical issue.

What does this mean for you?

There are about a gazillion things more worrying than coronavirus – including the flu.  Take a step back, relax, and read critically.

Excellent fact checking here.


Feb
25

Work comp medical costs – the real story

Workers’ comp medical costs are not increasing…

Even close followers of the industry would get the opposite impression; pretty much all industry “news”, marketing pitches, industry executive poll results and investor reports talk about rising medical costs or the fear thereof.

The best data out there indicates medical costs have been flat for at least five years – as in, no increase, inflation, or rise. According to NASI’s annual report on workers’ comp, total medical costs actually dropped – albeit marginally – from 2012 to 2017 (the most recent year available). (disclosure – I am a member of NASI, but am not involved in any of their research)

I’ll be the first to admit I was under the impression costs were going up every year – that’s what NCCI and others report, and based on their data and methodologies, that was generally accurate.

Here’s the issue with those metrics – most look at cost per lost time claim, or use actuarial projections to estimate fully-developed claim costs by accident year.

The cost per lost time claim is helpful, and according to most credible research costs are up slightly – on a per-claim basis.

Actuarial projections are much less so; over the last few years NCCI has consistently projected future costs would be higher than they turned out to be. That’s no slight on NCCI; actuarial methodologies and assumptions are based on historical results, and the impact of opioids is the proverbial black swan (one hopes).

This is a reminder that questioning one’s long-held beliefs on a regular basis is healthy, useful, and, yes, often humbling.

And that’s not to say costs aren’t increasing in places – facility costs in Florida and California and physical medicine are among the problem spots.

What does this mean for you?

We’ll dive into implications tomorrow. For now, check your business plan’s assumptions…


Feb
20

NO, higher indemnity payments ≠ longer disability

A recent piece in WorkCompCentral highlighted research that ostensibly said paying injured workers higher indemnity benefits results in longer disability duration and higher costs.

At least that’s what one might conclude from the headline – and the research report itself.

Except the research is preliminary (as noted in William Rabb’s article) , and actually reading Rabb’s WCC article – and the study itself – and doing a little Googling – reveals significant problems with the research.

To the researchers’ credit, they make it clear their conclusions are preliminary and “comments are welcome” but I fear many will read the headline, tweet it out, and use it as justification to reduce workers’ indemnity benefits.

Reality is, the study has multiple flaws, rendering the authors’ conclusion that:

“increasing the generosity of wage replacement benefits does not impact the number of claims but has a large impact on claimant behavior, leading to longer income benefit durations and increased medical spending.”

is baseless at best.

Among the multiple flaws in the study is the failure to account for other factors that may well have driven an increase in disability duration and medical expenses. The researchers based their analysis on workers’ compensation reforms in Texas and data from 2005 – 2009. The reforms, which increased disabled workers’ wage replacement levels, also affected many other parts of workers’ compensation regulations and benefits.

For example, medical reimbursement in 2008 spiked due to changes in the Texas WC medical fee schedule – which were largely driven by increases in Medicare’s fee schedule.

Then there’s the 2008 – 2009 recession, which significantly affected employment opportunities in the Lone Star State. I’d suggest that the recession affected employers’ desire and ability to return injured workers to jobs that no longer existed or where hours had been greatly reduced. It also limited re-employment opportunities for workers who no longer had jobs to return to.

2008 saw a steep decline in jobs towards the end of that year…

And the forecast for 2009 was even worse…

(for more discussion, here’s the Dallas Fed’s analysis. Evidently the authors didn’t read this, or if they did, did not reference it in their footnotes or references.)

What does this mean for you?

I’m no PhD economist – but I can do a Google search. And so can you – I’d encourage all to question “research” that makes bold assertions.

Especially when those assertions support one’s long held beliefs.


Feb
14

What’s up with WCRI 2020?

I asked WCRI President John Ruser PhD for the scoop on the upcoming WCRI annual conference…here’s the interview.

  1. What is different this year (format, topics, approach)?

Same credible WCRI research, but different topics (e.g., How Injuries, Claims, and Outcomes Change with Age; Alternatives to Opioids for Pain Management; Readmission and Re-operation Rates among Workers’ Compensation Patients, etc.).

Same focus on the pressing issues of today, but different ones compared to 2019 (e.g. Generational Differences and Stereotypes in the Workplace; Economic Cycles and Their Impact on the Labor Market; Prioritizing Mental Health for Workers Injured on the Job, etc.).

  1. What are the issues your members are most concerned about?

The issues on this year’s agenda (e.g., opioid alternatives, generational differences, the impact of the economy on the workers’ compensation system, and mental health) are issues that all of our diverse membership is concerned about and would benefit from learning more about, which is why the theme of our conference is Gaining Clarity Through Research.

  1. There are some deeper dives into aspects of medical care delivery and outcomes (e.g. readmission rates), which appears to be a change from previous conferences, can you talk about that?

We are continuously looking to help all stakeholders understand the most significant issues in the workers’ compensation system today. Naturally, these are going to change from year-to-year based on what we are seeing; external actors and factors (i.e., business cycles, elections, etc.); new technologies; and new research, etc.

  1. What are the work comp issues that are least understood and most impactful on employers that will be addressed by this year’s conference?

Although many of the topics our sessions delve into may not be new to employers, they will benefit from the independent research and expert perspectives that is the hallmark of our sessions and conference.

That said, one issue that we could all stand to better understand is our panel on prioritizing mental health, since serious workplace injuries can lead to anxiety, depression, and other mental health issues. Indeed, new research from Boston University (BU) Professor Les Boden found that an injury serious enough to result in at least a week off work almost tripled the risk of suicide among women, and increased the risk by 50 percent among men.

To help us better understand the challenges workers face to their mental health after a workplace injury, as well as to learn about initiatives to address those challenges, we have assembled a distinguished panel: Prof. Boden; President Steven Tolman of the Massachusetts AFL-CIO; Dr. Kenneth Larsen of the New England Baptist Hospital; and Mary Christiansen of Southern California Edison.

  1. What has been the most significant change in the conference over the last five years?

We seek to continue to identify those topics that are of greatest interest to attendees.  An indication of our success is that our conference keeps growing, and based on registration today compared to last year, we are on course to do so again.

Those who attend value that this a research-based conference, that there are high-level networking opportunities, and that the conference is of appropriate length.

This combination brings a diverse and dedicated (senior-level) crowd of people who are interested in understanding the trends that are occurring in workers’ comp and learning actionable items they can use in their jobs.

I’d add that the Conference always sells out.  To make sure you’re not this guy, register here.

.


Feb
12

Now’s the time to fix that roof.

Barring some catastrophic exogenic event (war with Iran, pandemic, sudden recession) – workers’ comp premiums will continue to shrink.

Meanwhile, despite compelling evidence work comp execs are worried about the opposite problem – that they won’t be able to raise rates high and fast enough if something bad happens. This at a time when industry profits have never been higher, insurers are awash with cash and all indicators point to continued low combined ratios.

Claim frequency continues to decline (yes there are increases here and there but these are NOT altering the decades-long trend). I penned a four-parter on frequency a while back that provides more detail.

The large and mid-sized payers I speak with are seeing declines in claim counts.

Medical costs are flat – and have been for several years.

Yet NCCI’s poll of workers’ comp execs finds these folks are worried about rate adequacy. (that means claims costs will go up faster than insurance premiums, leading to financial losses for insurers)

Wrong problem, folks.

The real issue facing C-Suiters is declining premium dollars – which means less money to pay for administrative expenses – which means fewer dollars to invest in:

  • IT and new IT projects
  • revamping claims systems
  • electronic connections to providers, vendors, and other third parties
  • adjuster training and retention
  • innovation

I get that CEOs have to do worse-case scenario planning – but the chances of that worst-case (claim costs increase and rate increases can’t keep up) happening are minimal. Yet this “problem” is top-of-mind (according to NCCI) – so execs are:

investing in predictive analytics to help with pricing and dedicating more resources to actuarial research and analysis. Insurers are closely evaluating and monitoring risks for the purposes of acceptability, pricing and coverage.

There is compelling evidence that rates are too high now – and will remain too high for some time to come.  The cause is the steep drop in opioid usage among work comp patients, a drop that is slashing claim duration, increasing claim closures, and reducing reserves.

Opioid users’ claim costs are more than double non-opioid users. As usage plummets, rate decreases lag far behind. The result – today’s rates are based on what happened years ago – not what’s happening now.

Graph courtesy CWCI, p 19, The Impact of Declining Opioid Use on Lost-Time Claim Development & Outcomes in California Workers’ Compensation 

While the impact of rapidly decreasing opioid usage – and concomitant reduction in claims costs – is real indeed, rating models and methodologies haven’t caught up to this reality.

This is the problem execs should be devoting most of their time to – how will they manage their business with less revenue than they have today.

The time to fix the roof is when the sun is shining. Work comp execs would be well-advised to invest their record profits in ways that:

  • improve efficiency,
  • automate low-value tasks, and
  • most importantly – assure effective medical care.

What does this mean for you?

You don’t want to be on a roof in a rainstorm.

More on this in a free webinar hosted by WorkCompCentral February 27. Register here.

.


Jan
27

What I missed when I was busy working last week…

Workers’ comp

HomeCareConnect launched a new service last week intended to smooth the transition for patients moving from acute care facilities to a skilled rehab facility.  HCC folks have credentialed and contracted some 15,000 providers; combining these providers with HCC’s in-house care coordination staff should help adjusters and case managers manage the complex needs of these patients.

The folks at the California State Comp Insurance Fund produced a pretty campy – and pretty useful – video training series about data security.  Not often a CEO allows her/himself to be the object lesson for training…

The fine folk at WCRI have a free webinar Thursday, Jan. 30, 2020, at 1:00 p.m. ET reviewing Pennsylvania’s workers’ comp systemRegister here…And do it now, as there’s a 500 viewer limit.

Friend and colleague Dwight Robertson MD penned an excellent piece on opioid management.  Dwight, who is the Medical Director for Employers’ Insurance, has found that three tactics can make a big difference; get on those opioid claims much sooner, have a direct conversation with the prescriber about the opioid plan, and focus on alternative approaches to pain management.

A quick read and quite topical.

Group health

Private insurers’ facility payments differ wildly; comparing them to Medicare indicates inpatient costs are roughly 2.4x Medicare, while outpatient is even higher at 2.9x.

The pic below is from an interactive tool that enables you to see what your state looks like. Spoiler alert – Orlando’s Florida Hospital gets more than 3x Medicare…

Here’s my Capt. Obvious moment – your healthcare insurer is paying more than twice what Medicare is – which means huge profits for your hospital.

And that’s why your insurance premiums, deductibles, and out of pocket costs are so high.

What does this mean for you?

Good stuff happening in workers’ comp, while hospitals are the biggest reason your health insurance premiums, deductibles and out of pocket payments are zooming

 


Dec
12

Proof – health insurance saves lives

Having health insurance reduces your risk of dying.

Intuitively, this makes sense; you get cancer diagnoses and treatment, colon cancer screening, access to drugs and behavioral health treatment and flu shots.

You can read the details here, but the net is individuals who received a letter from CMS telling them they’d paid a penalty for not enrolling in health insurance were more likely to sign up than a control group that did not get a letter.

And, those who signed up had a lower mortality rate.

From NYTimes:

gaining coverage was associated with a 12 percent decline in mortality over the two-year study period (the first months of coverage seemed to be most important, presumably because people could get caught up on various appointments and treatments they might have been missing). [emphasis added]

This is the first conclusive, unequivocal research showing health insurance impacts your chance of dying.

From the Treasury Department’s study; the control group did NOT get the letter:

Two things of note.

  1.  The Trump Administration has cut the healthcare outreach budget by 72 percent.
  2. Republicans killed the individual mandate which forced people to get health insurance or pay a penalty.

What does this mean for you?

One can argue whether it is government’s role to provide or ensure coverage, one cannot argue this: more people will die due to this Administration’s policies.


Dec
10

in which I cover newsworthy stuff that happened this week…

Uh…that’s why you buy insurance

From Politico we hear CMS Administrator Seema Verna asked us taxpayers to pay for $47,000 worth of jewelry and other stuff stolen “during a work-related trip.” Among the valuables gone missing – that she wanted us to pay for were a $325 moisturizer (!!!) and $349 for noice-canceling headphones – plus a $5,900 Ivanka Trump pendant.

Yep, the person who runs the biggest insurance entities in the world wants the government to bail her out because she decided to NOT buy insurance. (update – good news, we aren’t paying for Ms Verma’s bling)

Physical therapy in workers comp

MedRisk released its third annual report on PT in WC earlier this week.  560,000 work comp patients were served by MedRisk so far this year; the average duration of care has shrunk to 11.2 visits over 48 days.  Better news – 98.1% patient satisfaction rate and 97.7% of providers agree with MedRisk’s clinical recommendations.

There’s an old business meme that comes to mind – “stick to your knitting.”

At a time when other service companies were seeking to become everything to everyone, Shelley Boyce, Mike Ryan and their colleagues at MedRisk went the other direction, focusing narrowly on work comp physical medicine. Along with the best management team in the business, they executed the plan to perfection. (While MedRisk is an HSA consulting client, all the credit goes to those folks).

Meanwhile all the caterwauling about drug prices turns out to be much ado about nothing (I’m looking at you, AARP) . This from the estimable Adam Fein PhD’s discussion of CMS’ review of healthcare costs:

    • For 2018, spending on outpatient prescription drugs grew by 2.5%—below the spending growth rate on hospitals, physician services, and overall national healthcare costs.
    • CMS significantly lowered its previously reported drug spending figures by billions after incorporating new data on manufacturers’ rebates.

More news showing hospital consolidation raises your healthcare costs.

From NIHCM comes a terrific slideshow – my favorite is this one – key takeaway is prices ALWAYS GO UP after mergers.