National Council of Self
Transcription
National Council of Self
November 2009 National Council of Self-Insurers contents Nona Grancell Reelected President Macy’s Department Stores, Owens-Illinois, United States Steel Elected to Board of Managers Thank You to Sponsors New Members HR 635 NCSI Amicus Brief Supports Exclusive Remedy Don CeSar – Site of 2010 Meeting Traumatic Brain Injuries: Poorly Identified and Treated Workers’ Compensation Pharmacy Benefit Management Value Workers’ Compensation Issues of 2009 Taming Medical Cost Inflation Beating Workers’ Compensation Fraud with Technology Workers’ Compensation National Reform: Affecting and Implementing Jurisdictional Change Management of Musculoskeletal Injuries Driving Accurate Impairment Ratings: New AMA Guides to Evaluation of Permanent Impairment – Sixth Edition 2009 Annual Meeting Photos Executive Director: Larry Holt 1253 Springfield Avenue, PMB 345, New Providence, NJ 07974 908-665-2152 FAX: 908-665-4020 E-mail: [email protected] Website: www.natcouncil.com Nona Grancell Reelected President At the 2009 annual meeting in Greater Palm Springs, CA, the Board of Managers reelected Nona Grancell the President of the National Council of Self-Insurers. Active in the California Self-Insurers Association, Ms. Grancell is currently the Executive Director-Emeritus of the Association. Her office is in Los Angeles. The Board also reelected, Dave Kaplan, the Vice President of the National Council. Mr. Kaplan is the Executive Director of the Washington Self-Insurers Association, the second largest state self-insurers association in the country. His office is in Olympia. Max Koonce was appointed to the third officer position on the Executive Committee, Past President. The Board of Managers elected Buz Minor of the Ohio Self-Insurers Association as well as reelected Greg Saxum of the Self-Insurers Association of New York to represent state self-insurers associations on the Executive Committee. Additionally, the Board reelected Theresa Muir of Southern California Edison, Bob Steggert of Marriott International and Lynn Tatum of Tyson Foods to represent self-insured employers on the Executive Committee. Thank You to Sponsors The National Council of Self-Insurers expresses its appreciation to the following organizations for their financial contributions to the 2009 annual meeting of the National Council. California Self-Insurers Association Danville, CA CompPartners Agoura, CA Grancell, Lebovitz, Stander, Reubens and Thomas El Segundo, CA Modern Medical Lewis Center, OH Professional Medical Specialties (PRO MED) Maitland, FL New Members Macy’s Department Stores, Owens-Illinois, United States Steel Elected to Board of Managers At the business session during the 2009 annual meeting of the National Council of Self-Insurers, the members of the Council elected Macy’s Department Stores of Cincinnati, OH; Owens-Illinois of Perrysburg, OH and United States Steel of Pittsburgh, PA to the Board of Managers. Company representatives are Anne Schnure of Macy’s Department Stores; Thad Franklin of Owens-Illinois and Dr. Charles Prezzia of United States Steel. The National Council of Self-Insurers is happy to announce and welcome the following new members: AmTrust North America Duluth, GA Designated Representative: Steve Yount Bauer Investigation, LLC Albuquerque, NM Designated Representative: Grant Bauer Biancamano & Di Stefano Edison, NJ Designated Representative: Matthew Gitterman Cedars-Sinai Health Systems Los Angeles, CA Designated Representative: Shirley Pettigrew Impairment Resources, LLC San Diego, CA Designated Representative: Leslie Dilbeck Claim Insights Farmington, CT Designated Representative: John N. Wilson Information Builders, Inc. Mount Sinai, NY Designated Representative: Robert T. Lynch Cliffstar Corporation Dunkirk, NY Designated Representative: Kevin M. Sanvidge Iowa Self-Insurers Association West Des Moines, IA Designated Representative: Matt Eide Colorado Hospital Assoc. Shared Services Greenwood Village, CO Designated Representative: Gary Swenson Learning Care Group, Inc. Novi, Michigan Designated Representative: Jeffrey J. Gehrke Cost Containment Solutions Nashville, TN Designated Representative: Jody Ball Leonard Family Corporation San Antonio, TX Designated Representative: Melanie J. Schulte David Donn Consulting San Francisco, CA Designated Representative: David Donn MedAllocators, Inc. Duluth, GA Designated Representative: Chris Carpenter Dominion Diagnostics North Kingstown, RI Designated Representative: Frank A. Fornari, Ph.D. MediCor Lawrenceville, GA Designated Representative: Richard Duhe FAIRPAY Solutions Avon, OH Designated Representative: Rachel Wey Momentum Healthcare, Inc. Jacksonville, FL Designated Representative: Jerry G. Albert Fulmer, LeRoy Ft. Lauderdale, FL Designated Representative: C. Richard Fulmer Montana Self-Insurers Guaranty Fund East Helena, MT Designated Representative: Jeff Lapham Hack, Piro, O’Day, Merklinger, Wallace & McKenna Florham Park, NJ Designated Representative: John T. West MyMatrixx Tampa, FL Designated Representative: Mike Bunkley Horsemen, Inc. Huntington Beach, CA Designated Representative: Jeffrey Walters NextImage Medical San Diego, CA Designated Representative: Elizabeth Griggs Network Synergy Group Tampa, FL Designated Representative: Shawn Twiss Overland Solutions, Inc. Overland Park, KS Designated Representative: Mario Fiel Paradigm Management Services Concord, CA Designated Representative: Kelly Wilson PMSI Tampa FL Designated Representative: Heather O’Brien PPG Industries, Inc. Allison Park, PA Designated Representative: Cyndi J. Greco H.R. 635 On January 22, 2009, Congressman Joseph Baca of California introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives, H.R. 635, “National Commission on State Workers’ Compensation Laws Act of 2009.” The legislation would establish a national commission to study and evaluate the adequacy of state workers’ compensation laws and report back to Congress its findings and recommendations. H.R. 635 has been referred to the House Committee on Education and Labor. The National Council is opposed to HR. 635 for the following reasons: Each state’s workers compensation system has always been the responsibility of its own government - the legislative, judicial and administrative branches of the state. The federal government has never and should not now interfere in the operation of a system that has served the states well for decades. Prime Industrial Recruiters, Inc. Tulsa, OK Designated Representative: Donna J. Long In response to their own studies, the states, through the years, have substantially increased their level of benefits and expanded the availability of their benefits to injured workers. Sowell Gray Stepp & Laffitte, LLC Columbia, SC Designated Representative: Grady L. Beard, Esq. Employers have improved their workers’ access to excellent medical treatment, advanced their safety records and strengthened their programs to return their employees to work. Stumar Investigations Norristown, PA Designated Representative: Lloyd Brown The cost of a study commission and staff is especially unnecessary during this time of strained federal and state budgets. The current state-based workers’ compensation system provides each state the ability to experiment creatively and borrow from experiences in other states without the burden of a “one size fits all” federal program. Congressman Baca’s intent was to fast-track H.R. 635 through the U.S. House of Representatives. Due, however, to the multitude of letters sent by members of the NCSI and others in the business community to the members of the House, expressing opposition to the “National Commission on State Workers’ Compensation Laws Act of 2009,” Congressman Baca did not achieve quick passage of H.R. 635. In response to the broadly based opposition of business, Congressman Baca renewed his initiative to achieve co-sponsors of H.R. 635. The result is that the ensuing Congressmen are now co-sponsors: Rep. Gerry Connolly (D-VA), Rep. Alan Grayson (D-FL), Rep. Marcy Kaptur (D-OH), Rep. Raul Grijalva (D-AZ), Rep. Dale Kildee (D-MI) and Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-OH). Significantly, the last three are on the House Education and Labor Committee, to whom HR 635 has been referred. If HR 635 gains additional sponsors, the likelihood of action within the next six months increases. If you or your organization has not already sent a letter of opposition to your U.S. House of Representative, the Executive Committee of the National Council of Self-Insurers asks you to promptly send a letter. NCSI’s Amicus Brief Supports Exclusive Remedy The National Council of Self-lnsurers, Illinois Self-lnsurers Association and Ohio Self-lnsurers Association have filed an Amicus brief with the United States Supreme Court to affirm the exclusive remedy of workers’ compensation. The United States Court of Appeals (Sixth Circuit) has ruled that six employees of Cassens Transport Company may proceed with their Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) suit, alleging that Cassens, its TPA for workers’ compensation and a doctor illegally denied the employees benefits for workplace injuries. Cassens Transport has petitioned the Supreme Court to review the decision of the Court of Appeals. The Amicus brief states that if the decision holds, employees, who say they are injured at work, will be able to prosecute RICO actions in state and federal courts as well as actions in workers’ compensation courts. Cassens Transport, a car hauling company, is headquartered in Edwardsville, Illinois. The preparation of the Amicus brief was coordinated by the Illinois Self-lnsurers Association. The brief was written by Chris Gibbons and Richard Kimnach of the Association. Don CeSar - Site of 2010 Meeting The 2010 annual meeting of the National Council of SelfInsurers will be from Sunday, May 23 to Wednesday, May 26 at the Don CeSar Beach Resort in St. Pete Beach, Florida. The Don CeSar is directly on the Gulf of Mexico. The room rate at the Don CeSar that the National Council has achieved for its conference is $174 per night, single or double occupancy. Also, the $10 daily resort fee per person will be waived. The following is taken from a brochure of the Don CeSar: “There is a common phrase that says, ‘elegance is simple.’ This was true in 1928 when Thomas Rowe first opened the Pink Palace (Don CeSar) and remains true today. The easy comfort of plantation shutters and ceiling fans, along with the refined indulgence of rich mahogany and shimmering crystal, seamlessly blend to create a feeling of tranquil luxury. The openness in each guest room accompanied, by the therapeutic golden Florida sunshine make each morning a special experience.” The Don CeSar has a Four Diamond rating. For more information visit: www.loewshotels.com/en/Hotels/ St-Pete-Beach-Resort/Overview.aspx Traumatic Brain Injuries: Poorly Identified and Treated As part of the 2009 annual meeting of the National Council of Self-Insurers, Chris Nowinski; President of Sports Legacy Institute, a Harvard graduate and a former wrestler with World Wrestling Entertainment; gave a presentation regarding the challenges and dreadful effects of the poor identification and treatment of head injuries. A synopsis of his presentation follows. Traumatic brain injury (TBI) has always been a major concern in workers’ compensation, but recent research coming out the sports world is rapidly changing our understanding of the long-term consequences of TBI. This new understanding from sports is likely applicable to occupational and industrial injuries, and therefore may signal a changing landscape in workers’ compensation for self-insurers. Recent studies show that the public health burden of sportsrelated concussions and brain trauma is far greater than athletes and families have ever appreciated. The research has also shown that a lack of proper education and response after TBI has made the problem far worse. Early adoption of the lessons learned in sports may provide the insurance and workers’ compensation fields opportunities to provide better, more efficient, and less costly care after TBI. I am a survivor of multiple TBIs. I used to wrestle in World Wrestling Entertainment as Chris “Harvard” Nowinski, a snobby character that built upon my genuine Ivy League education. I was forced to retire at the age of 25 due to too many concussions suffered in WWE and playing football at Harvard University, and have since dedicated my life to the sports concussion crisis. To advance our understanding of the consequences of repetitive trauma to the brain, I founded the non-profit Sports Legacy Institute (SLI) in 2007 with Dr. Robert Cantu, and we partnered with Boston University School of Medicine to create the Center for Study of Traumatic Encephalopathy (CSTE), the only center in the world to focus solely on the long-term effects of repetitive TBI. The CSTE operates a brain bank where analyze the brains of former athletes to learn how repetitive trauma affects the brain on a microscopic level. From September 2008 through June 2009, six of six former football players, all of whom died between the ages of 18 and 66, were diagnosed to be suffering from Chronic Traumatic Encephalopathy (CTE). CTE is a progressive degenerative brain disease caused by trauma and marked by excessive amounts of the protein tau throughout the brain. CTE shares some symptoms and pathology with Alzheimer’s disease, but is a distinct disease. Deceased former NFL players who suffered from CTE include John Grimsley, Tom McHale, Mike Webster and Andre Waters. Combined with external research, 10 of 11 football players ever studied have been diagnosed with CTE, all in the last eight years. CTE, previously known by the term “punch drunk” as it frequently affects boxers, is a devastating disease than can occur in anyone that suffers trauma to the brain. Prior to death, the CTE sufferers tend to suffer memory loss, confusion, impaired judgment, paranoia, impulse control problems, aggression, depression, and, eventually, progressive dementia. There is great concern that CTE affects a significant percentage of contact sports athletes. In the workers’ compensation field, this and other new research provides three key insights: First, TBI’s that may seem to lead to a full recovery can actually cause a life-long degenerative disease that currently can only be identified post-mortem. Second, employees that have past brain injuries may already have CTE or be predisposed to more severe symptoms following a TBI due to past brain injuries. Third, acute response and management after traumatic brain injury is crucial to giving an employee the best chance at a full recovery. In light of these insights, it may be time to reevaluate your approach to traumatic brain injury, especially when it comes to prevention and education. In the sports world education is a key component to gain buy-in from athletes in respecting TBI, allowing athletes to know when to seek care and methods to minimize their exposure to risky situations. The goal is to help athletes return to play at full strength and minimize the risk of long-term effects. A similar model applied in workers’ compensation may reduce the overall burden of TBI in the workplace. Mr. Nowinski may be reached at [email protected] Workers’ Compensation Pharmacy Benefit Management Value The following article was written by Brian Carpenter, Vice President of Clinical Services at First Script Network. It is a synopsis of Mr. Carpenter’s presentation at the National Council of Self-Insurers’ 2009 annual meeting. Pharmacy Benefit Management programs provide value through four primary points: • Reducing drug spend through discounts from state and federal fee schedules • Utilization management through plan edits and drug list design at point of sale • Retrospective drug utilization review • Data analytics Without PBMs in place, many payers use bill review vendors to manage drug costs. Most bill review vendors price the transactions at fee schedule providing little savings or utilization management. PBMs typically price lower than fee schedule providing extra savings. In many cases, the bill review charge per transaction may be lower or even eliminated since there is no further reduction available below the PBM contracted rate. The main focus for payers in the past has been to reduce the cost of goods through discounts. While price points still are a major concern, real value and savings can be obtained on utilization management. Point-of-service (POS) utilization management is comprised of two components: (1) plan design such as days supply, forced generics, available mail service, etc; and (2) drug list design. The PBM can provide general best practice plan design to the payers. The payer and the PBM can use this best practice as a starting point in developing the best program for the payer’s employee base. Drug list design can be very simplistic to extremely sophisticated based on the need of the payer. The simple design is a singular drug list that reflects medications typically used in workers’ comp. The more sophisticated model includes claim information that identifies and aligns specific-injury types to a limited drug list design. For instance, an injured worker with a burned arm would have different medications available to them than a person with a head trauma. This type of design has proven to reduce calls into the claims examiners, reduce unnecessary authorizations and decrease payer drug spend. New claims produce the best outcome for this model due to the up front effort of claims management. For older claims, the model is less successful due to the historic medication utilization that must be overcome. For the older claims, the best tool available today is a drug utilization review (DUR) that incorporates both drug usage and medical history. Combining the two elements provide a similar outcomes, retrospectively, as the POS process. Suggested review topics include but not limited to: prevention of therapeutic duplication, provide therapeutic alternatives for safety and cost reduction, evaluating medical records and drug/disease, drug/drug and drug/age interactions, and appropriate dosing using national guidelines. The full analysis can be then used to support other medical disciplines such as case management and physician review. An important point to be made is that pharmacy is just one aspect of the total health care continuum. Drug management cannot occur in a vacuum. The PBM can provide great data analytics and trending for claimant drug utilization. The PBM can provide feedback to the prescribers in appropriate dosing and drug utilization with respect to injury. However, Workers’ Compensation Pharmacy Benefit Management Value prescribers spend little time working with the PBM in driving outcomes that can drive better results that include both claim cost reduction and improve patient response. The PBM can provide the injured worker the right medication for the appropriate injury at a macro-level. What the PBM is unable to provide is if the right drug is compatible or even used by the claimant. To close such a gap, counseling and urine/blood analysis could be used as a marker for patient compliance. Use of other services or medical disciplines such as case management and a strong total medical utilization management approach and other such services will help drive the overall therapeutic outcomes that the payers and the injured workers desire. Mr. Carpenter can be reached at [email protected] Workers’ Compensation Issues of 2009 The following article was written by Ken Martino, President and Chief Executive Officer of Broadspire Services, a Crawford Company. It is a synopsis of Mr. Martino’s presentation at the National Council of SelfInsurers’2009 annual meeting. The workers’ compensation industry continues to change and it is vital to remain abreast of developments to better understand present conditions, visualize where the industry is heading and to develop strategies to mitigate adverse trends. Indemnity claim expenses, which have not attracted much attention, continue to grow at a steady pace. While indemnity claim costs increased by an average of only 1.7 percent in the early ‘90s, an upward trend began in 1996. When final numbers are released for 2008, it is expected that costs will have increased another 5 percent. The struggling economy, however, is likely to slow this upward trend as wage increases continue to be modest while employers work through difficult financial times. The encouraging news – that the unit cost of medical services (with the exceptions of hospital and pharmacy expenses) has remained relatively flat is diminished by increased utilization. A trend of increased utilization has contributed greatly to an ongoing rise in medical costs, which increased an average of 6.9 percent annually from 2002 through 2007 and are expected to have jumped an additional 6 percent during 2008. Increased utilization has placed the traditional role and use of medical networks at a crossroad. Cost containment strategies must address more than unit cost – they must examine overall care plans to help control utilization. According to a recent NCCI study, the frequency rate for workers’ compensation drops during a recession more due to job creation than job destruction. While there tends to be an increased moral hazard during a recession, when employees may report claims as a means of job/benefit protection, the increase tends to be tempered by the lack of job creation. While claim frequency has been declining, a tough economy has historically contributed to increased medical severity and longer durations. And once again, increased utilization is the primary driver for higher medical costs. A number of factors impede return to work during challenging economic times and contribute to increased utilization. Many employees consider their disabled status as a form of job security and hesitate to return to work because of employment uncertainty. In addition, working through state workers’ compensation systems tends to slow because of staffing cutbacks and reductions in availability hours. Any factor that contributes to slower return to work also contributes to increased utilization and higher medical costs. The workers’ compensation industry faces specific challenges as we near the second decade of the 21st century. The percentage of overweight Americans continues to grow, and studies have shown a direct correlation between the number of workers’ compensation claims and obesity. The most obese employees (those 40 pounds or more overweight) file twice as many claims as healthy-weight workers. Another trend, an aging workforce, is also likely to impact the overall cost of workers’ compensation. Because older employees tend to heal slower than their younger counterparts, workers’ compensation claim durations and severity are sure to be impacted. Many employers understand the challenge of finding and retaining qualified staff, and the healthcare and TPA industries are not immune. A shortage of nurses and claims adjusters is likely to continue, and staffing is another area that requires creative strategies to remain competitive. Technology continues to drive progress and efficiency. Advances in computer hardware and software have made predictive modeling a more appealing knowledge model to guide claim workflow. Another advancement that may gain traction: self-service. As technology helps stimulate increased independence among consumers, self-service in the claims area may be on the horizon. Healthcare reform is a topic that continues to stimulate controversy throughout the country. Despite some concerns, it is highly unlikely that any healthcare reform will resemble the universal systems presently in Canada and many European countries. As any healthcare reform unfolds, expect individual states to be very protective of their workers’ compensation systems and fend off any direct impact. However, any major reforms in healthcare delivery or reimbursement are sure to have an impact on workers’ compensation loss costs. Mr. Martino can be reached at [email protected] Taming Medical Cost Inflation that 50% of medical spending arises from 6.2% of all claims, those which exceed $100,000 in medical spending. The following article was written by Kevin Fleming, President of Paradigm Management Services. It is a synopsis of Mr. Fleming’s presentation at the National Council of SelfInsurers’ 2009 annual meeting. Medical cost inflation in workers compensation is nearly double that of healthcare inflation overall, a pattern which has been true for close to a decade. Given these costs, one of the most formidable challenge in workers compensation is figuring out how to improve recovery outcomes of injured workers while holding at bay the surging costs of medical care. Cost containment efforts to date have not stopped the upward trend. They have undoubtedly lowered the incline going up, but clearly more is needed to curb the escalating medical expenses that plague the workers compensation industry. The conventional focus of insurers is to try to lower the cost of each individual unit of care, such as a diagnostic test or a physical therapy visit. A common strategy is to contract with medical provider networks that negotiate discounts with providers. However, as studies have shown conclusively, the number of treatments is more important than unit costs in driving medical costs, and can quickly undo the benefits generated by the negotiated discounts. What is needed is a far more reaching cost containment approach to control medical costs. This can only be accomplished with a balanced approach: first to sharpen the tools insurers already employ to contain costs, and second, to address the most costly cases with distinct practices. The most costly cases, catastrophic, chronic, and pain-related, generate a vast proportion of medical costs. These are medically complex cases. Some may not start that way, but within a year the medical picture has become very complex. The National Council on Compensation Insurance reports To accomplish the aim of combating medical cost inflation, five strategies can be employed. Strategy 1: Sharpen Your Traditional Tools Insurers have traditionally focused much of their attention on medical expenses that are high volume, standardized, and susceptible to narrowly designed means of control. These expenses include physical therapy, medications, durable medical equipment, and diagnostic tests. The vendor community has developed a plethora of highly specialized tools to containing these costs. These tools annually trim away at over a hundred million medical events, across over a million claims, cutting costs by the tens or hundreds of dollar per transaction. It is important to ensure that you have the essentials in place for utilization review, pharmacy benefit management, and to follow strong practices that will help ensure your programs remain sharp such as benchmarking results to maintain focus. Strategy 2: Contain chronic pain treatment Pain care is in a class by itself, especially important to monitor because chronic pain conditions are linked to claims that account for half of total claims costs. Much of the treatment for chronic pain is controversial, expensive, very often ineffective, and even harmful to the patient. Patients are often treated with expensive drugs, and undergo care by anesthesiologists and orthopedic surgeons. Months and even years may elapse without the claimant experiencing sustained pain relief. The smart insurer picks a team of expert doctors and nurses to monitor these claimants, consult with treating doctors, and propose fresh approaches to treatment before it is too late to change the course of care. Companies such as Paradigm Management Services have used expert physicians, onsite nurses that specialize in pain and an extensive amount of data about pain care effectiveness to inform their medical management strategy. Dr. Nathan Cope, Chief Medical Officer for Paradigm reports that more than 50% of the pain cases managed by Paradigm result in completely eliminating narcotics use, while creating a 184% return on investment for insurers. Strategy 3: Carve Out The Management of Catastrophic Injuries Severe burns, spinal cord injuries traumatic brain injuries, and other major injuries are also in a special class by themselves. They are rare – about 5 cases out of 1,000 claims but can consume 10% to 20% of all medical dollars. Care can be extremely difficult to deliver, as multiple treatment teams get involved and risks of complications are high. Clinicians with national expertise in each type of catastrophic injury should be recruited to treat and consult on these injuries. Recently Milliman, Inc., the leading actuarial firm in the US, found that Paradigm Management Services was able to get catastrophic patients back to work at five times the industry average and save insurers 36% on lifetime medical costs through the use of expert doctors and a systematic process of medical management. Strategy 4: Keep Constant Watch over Former Catastrophic Injury Patients Unless an injured worker has returned to work, the chances of that person developing additional complications stemming from their initial injury are very high. “We see cases that were not managed appropriately in the initial stages of the injury spiking with medical complications two to 15 years post injury,” says Dr. Cope whose company manages post catastrophic cases as well. “The same strategies that work for managing chronic pain and catastrophic injuries will help course correct medical complications that arise years later,” says Dr. Cope. “The key is to see the spike coming by watching for escalating costs, so that you can contain the damage early.” The Final Analysis In summary, sharpen your tools to control high volume, standardized expenses. Build your medical expertise to monitor and influence doctor treatment plans. The ultimate medical cost containment solution is timely and complete patient recovery. Smart insurers acquire the expertise to discern who is best to provide what care at what time in the course of treatment leading to recovery. Mr. Fleming can be reached at [email protected] Beating Workers’ Compensation Fraud with Technology The following is a summary of the presentation by John Swedo at the 2009 annual meeting of the National Council of SelfInsurers. Mr. Swedo is Vice President-Claims for American Insurance Services Group, a unit of ISO. Property/casualty insurance fraud costs self-insurers and insurers billions of dollars annually. According to USAA Magazine, studies show that 10 percent of property/casualty claims and 36 percent of bodily injury claims involve fraud or inflation of otherwise legitimate claims. The Coalition Against Insurance Fraud estimates that workers compensation insurance fraud costs insurers and employers a whopping $6 billion a year. Those who fight fraud — insurers, employers, state insurance fraud bureaus, and law enforcement — face significant barriers in identifying and prosecuting fraud, but are being assisted today by new technologies and analytic capabilities. There are three types of workers compensation fraud: Claimant (employee) fraud occurs when false or exaggerated injury claims are filed. Claims can be filed for injuries not received on the job, or to collect benefits while actually working other jobs. Claimant fraud trends can reflect general economic conditions. The National Insurance Crime Bureau recently reported that there has been an increase in the number of suspicious or “questionable claims” as the economy deteriorated. An analysis of questionable claims reported to the Bureau by its 1,000 members in the first quarter of 2009 compared those reported in the first quarter of 2008 shows significant increases. Questionable claims related to workers compensation increased 71 percent. There were significant increases in other lines as well. Questionable claims for hail damage increased 407 percent; suspicious vehicle fires/arsons were up 27 percent; and suspicious slip-and-fall claims under commercial policies were up 77 percent. Traditionally, 60 percent of injury claims payments covered the indemnity payment and 40 percent covered the medical costs. Today, that relationship is reversed. While frequency and indemnity payments are down, the medical costs (severity) have increased dramatically. The increase is attributed to organized crime and provider fraud. Provider fraud involves medical or treatment providers who exaggerate treatments for minor injuries or bill for treatments not actually provided. Employer premium fraud is represented by underreporting of payroll, misrepresentation of job classifications or the type of business, or classifying employees as independent contractors. An example is a temporary employment agency in New York that paid employees in cash to avoid paying payroll taxes and to reduce its workers compensation insurance premiums. Industry efforts to combat fraud are encouraged by regulators and legislators. There are two major focuses for industry antifraud efforts: 1) fraud awareness, and 2) investigation and enforcement. Fraud awareness involves fraud training for claims adjusters and underwriters to help them identify signs of suspect behavior or claims patterns. Support for public fraud awareness and education is also broad, involving insurers, the Coalition Against Insurance Fraud, consumer interest groups, and the National Insurance Crime Bureau. To support the antifraud effort, 38 states have established insurance fraud bureaus and several states have pending legislation. Fraud investigations and enforcement involves the insurance industry, lawmakers, and law enforcement, with many states investing significant resources in investigations and subsequent arrests and prosecutions. For example, in fiscal year 2006 – 07, the California District Attorney’s W.C. Fraud Program reported that it prosecuted 1,115 cases involving 1,224 suspects — resulting in 499 convictions and orders for restitution totaling $25 million. Today, there are effective technology and analytic tools for combating fraud: Fraud Indicators (‘Red Flags”) — Red flags are characteristics of claims that frequently indicate fraud. Examples of red flags are 1) the claimant was a seasonal worker at the time of the injury, or 2) there were no witnesses to the injury. Red flags can be applied in claims evaluation by claims handlers or claims systems. Industrywide Databases — Access to industrywide claims histories through participation in a shared database can be invaluable in fraud detection. Analysis of claims activity can reveal suspicious patterns or preexisting injuries. The insurance industry’s all-claims database has grown from 147 million claims in 1998 to over 660 million claims in all lines of business today — an increase of 347 percent. Other databases can provide insight into medical provider billing activity or medical sanctions, revealing suspicious patterns. Data Analysis and Visualization — Software that graphically shows links or connections between data elements in claims can reveal suspicious behavior. Examples are claimants connected to a vehicle that appears in multiple claims, or links between individuals that appear in several claims. Scoring and Predictive Analytics — Advanced analytic methods, such as regression analysis, social network analysis, and text mining, can examine vast numbers of claims and their attributes. Claims systems can score claim characteristics and identify red flags and patterns of claims. Premium Audit Models — Insurers routinely audit commercial accounts to make sure the premium collected for workers compensation, as well as commercial and general liability and commercial property insurance, is correct. Fraud detection can be one aspect of an audit. Predictive models can be used to optimize audit resources and effectiveness in three operational areas: deciding which accounts to audit; determining the most efficient allocation of mail, telephone, and physical audits; and optimizing the order of audits so any additional premium due the company can be identified early. In summary, there is a full arsenal of analytic technology at the disposal of self-insurers and insurers to detect fraud. While the challenges from fraud rings and fraudulent activity are formidable, the companies that will succeed and thrive are those that use technology and analytics effectively. They will be the leaders in the 21st century. Mr. Swedo may be reached at [email protected] Workers’ Compensation National Reform: Affecting and Implementing Jurisdictional Change The following is a synopsis of a presentation, at the 2009 annual meeting of the National Council of Self-Insurers, by Darrell Brown, Workers’ Compensation Practice Lead, and Kimberly George, Managed Care Practice Lead, both of Sedgwick Claims Management Services. National Reforms HR 635. Congress last undertook an evaluation of the workers’ compensation system in 1972. The project is better remembered for its cost than its results, having produced little in the way of concrete improvements. Representative Joseph Baca (Dem. California) has introduced legislation calling for a new national study. Many employers have expressed unease about the project for fear that some of the hard won gains in state reform might be endangered by heavy-handed, highly politicized national hearings on the system. If the bill passes, however, self-insurers and other employers will want to be at the table for whatever discussions are held. Currently the bill has been overshadowed by other matters, most notably the economy and national healthcare reform, and the outlook for final passage is unclear. MMSEA. The goal of the Medicare, Medicaid and SCHIP Extension Act of 2007 (the MMSEA) is to protect the Medicare System from shouldering costs that rightfully should fall to private insured and self-insured plans. The background reality is that particularly in no-fault and liability programs, there has been virtually no systematic enforcement of Medicare set-aside provisions, although the Medicare SetAside process in workers’ compensation is not perfect. The objectives of the Act are appropriate and fair, but the efforts of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (the CMS) to implement the legislation have been marked by a series of significant adjustments to the previously announced implementation requirements and deadlines. Self-insureds and other funders are rightly concerned that in addition to paying increased loss costs, they will be burdened by extremely expensive and complicated administrative and data reporting requirements. The CMS is seeking through public Town Hall Meetings and other avenues to smooth the path of implementation by gathering information and managing expectations. The CMS is to be commended for its receptivity to feedback from the Medicare Advocacy Recovery Coalition (MARC) and other engaged stakeholders. The adjustments to the implementation requirements have thus far been reasonable and positive for self-insurers and other funders, but the prospect of higher real costs remains. Brown v. Cassens. The decision of the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals to allow plaintiffs to proceed with a RICO complaint against an employer, TPA and physician on grounds they conspired to commit fraud in denying workers’ compensation benefits raises the real prospect that issues previously reserved for the workers’ compensation system and state administrative law judges may now be exposed to the greater costs, higher penalties, and uncharted water of the federal court system. Brown v. Cassens did not rule on the merits of the case, but the higher costs of the process itself may disadvantage self-insured employers in negotiations with workers’ compensation plaintiffs’ attorneys. State Reforms State-level engagements with workers’ compensation reform continue to focus on PPO discounting, medical networks, utilization review regulations, provider contracting practices and rising costs. Medical costs remain the primary drivers of reform efforts. In 2008 they reached approximately $30 billion, accounting for 58% of workers’ compensation costs in 2008 compared to 46% in 1988. California, Florida, Illinois, New York and Texas remain the bellwether states for reform and the assessment of its results. Attorneys, providers and others stakeholders continuously probe for soft spots to undo intended benefits of reforms in the courts, through unfavorable regulations, or through the development of revenue streams for services not addressed in reform measures. Is the pendulum of workers’ compensation reform swinging against the interests of employers and pro-jobs advocates? Especially in the confluence of economic and political changes shaking states such as California? There is a risk, but there are remedies: Self-insureds and other employers must focus on medical outcomes in designing MPNs as grounds for common interest among themselves, worker advocates and claims payers. Self-insured employers must also stay the course of legislative activism by remaining well informed, building and nurturing coalitions, prioritizing issues, planning and executing communications strategies with both voters and public officials, and participating in the political and regulatory process by providing information and data. Mr. Brown can be reached at [email protected] Management of Musculoskeletal Injuries Costco uses PreCare as their vendor partner to provide onsite injury prevention, PT and return to work (“RTW”) services at select warehouses across the United States. The goals of the overall PreCare program are: To reduce costs associated with work-related injuries by preventing them from occurring and facilitating efficient recovery for employees who are injured. In collaboration, create & implement solutions for ergonomic problems that increase risk of musculoskeletal injuries. To partner with case managers, claims examiners, treating physicians and warehouse management to facilitate an efficient return to work. PreCare hires, trains and manages physical therapists and athletic trainers (‘clinicians”) who provide services onsite for Costco. Each clinician is assigned to a set number of warehouses and visits each warehouse on a regular basis to provide services. The clinicians interface with employees, supervisors, management, physicians, case managers and claims examiners to facilitate injury prevention and efficient return to work. The primary focus for PreCare and Costco is prevention; prevention is the only way to avoid injuries with their associated costs to the injured worker and Costco. Prevention goals include: The following article was written by Sara Craig, Founder and CEO of PreCare Inc. It is a synopsis of the presentation by Ms. Craig and Katrina Zitnik at the National Council of Self-Insurers’ 2009 annual meeting. Ms. Zitnik is the Director of Workers’ Compensation for Costco Wholesale. Since 2003, Costco Wholesale has been utilizing an innovative and effective program to reduce the frequency and cost of work-related musculoskeletal injuries. Like many employers across the USA, strain/sprain injuries are Costco’s #1 injury. Musculoskeletal injuries are often caused by repetitive lifting, pushing and pulling activities and these injuries often result in the need for physical therapy (“PT”). For Costco in California, 28% of claims require PT and 17% of claim dollars are spent on PT. In Washington State, 42% of claims require PT and 30% of claim dollars are spent on PT. Assess and reduce risks for strain/sprain BEFORE an incident happens. Reduce unnecessary work to increase productivity and reduce employee fatigue. Provide education and early intervention for employees experiencing discomfort or excessive fatigue. PreCare provides a wide variety of prevention services for Costco. Clinicians provide Early Intervention Screenings, one-on-one Job Coaching, Work-n-Stretch/Conditioning Classes, Wellness Programs, Manager & employee training classes, new employee orientation, Safety team participation, Ergonomic Assessments & Recommendations and Project Consultation. All services are provided “in the trenches” with employees so the reality of the day-to-day work load and pace are incorporated into the program. For the injuries that do occur and require PT, PreCare clinicians provide treatment onsite at the warehouse. Costco provides a small, private space for the treatment. Treatments are one hour and include the work environment. Rather than simulating the work in a clinic, the patients actually perform appropriate work tasks as part of the rehabilitation process. This allows the injured employee to be educated while being conditioned back to full capacity work. Employees perceive the onsite treatment to be an added benefit to working with Costco. The program is enthusiastically embraced by both employees and management. Return to Work Job Coaching is for an employee who has an open claim, is not receiving physical therapy with PreCare, is on transitional work, and is not moving efficiently toward full duty. Costco refers employees to RTW Job Coaching if the claim is musculoskeletal and open after 30 days. Clinicians assess the referred employee’s current work capabilities compared to the physical demands of the job. The clinician then works with the employee on body mechanics, work technique, coaching, conditioning, demonstration and practice to get the employee safely released to full duty. Written communication is sent to the physician, claims examiner and case manager. This is extremely helpful in bridging the gap between the off-site vendor partners and the worksite and also reduces the employee’s chance for re-injury. Costco’s results have demonstrated that the PreCare program has been effective in both reducing cost and in employee satisfaction. In the states where PreCare is implemented (CA, WA, OR, NY, NJ), PT treatment duration, frequency and cost is less than in those states where PreCare has not yet been implemented. In regards to prevention results, the states where PreCare is implemented have a 32% less indemnity rate than those states where PreCare has not yet been implemented. Costco’s success in reduction of strain/sprain injuries and cost can be attributed to their philosophy that it is right to invest in employees’ overall health, safety and well-being. Sara Craig may be reached by email at [email protected] Katrina Zitnik may be reached by email at [email protected]. Driving Accurate Impairment Ratings: New AMA Guides to Evaluation of Permanent Impairment – Sixth Edition The following is a summary of the presentation by Christopher Brigham, MD, at the 2009 annual meeting of the National Council of Self-Insurers. Dr. Brigham is Chairman of Impairment Resources, LLC, and a Senior Contributing Editor for AMA Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment. Impairment ratings, typically based on the AMA Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment (Guides), drive an estimated twenty billion dollars of cost in state worker’s compensation systems. Studies have clearly documented that the majority of ratings are erroneously inflated, often two to three times higher than appropriate. The costs, human and financial, are marked and controllable. It is essential to recognize the problem and proactively managed these assessments. Driving accurate impairment ratings reflects both doing what is right and a superb opportunity for cost containment. Background The AMA Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment (Guides) is the most widely used basis for determining impairment. The presence of impairment should always be considered to reflect a failure - a failure in preventing an injury or illness, a failure in mitigating the impact of injury (i.e. not achieving full restoration of function), or a failure in rating a condition that is not work-related (i.e. degenerative processes, such as degenerative disk disease, that are not work-related). The finding of impairment is commonplace; ideally permanent impairment and permanent (partial or total) disability should be rare. AMA Guides - Sixth Edition The Sixth Edition, published in late 2007, standardized the rating process with the goal of improving accuracy. A second printing of the Guides published in 2009 incorporated corrections and clarifications. The Sixth Edition uses the framework based upon the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF), a comprehensive model of disablement developed by the World Health Organization. The Sixth Edition was based on five axioms: 1. The Guides adopts the terminology and conceptual framework of disablement as put forward by the International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health (ICF). 2. The Guides becomes more diagnosis based with these diagnoses being evidence-based when possible. 3. Simplicity, ease-of-application, and following precedent, where applicable, are given high priority, with the goal of optimizing interrater and intrarater reliability. 4. Rating percentages derived according to the Guides are functionally based, to the fullest practical extent possible. 5. The Guides stresses conceptual and methodological congruity within and between organ system ratings. The Sixth Edition reflects a significant advancement, particularly by having a unified approach that is designed to promote more consistent and reasonable ratings. Ambiguity was reduced and areas of abuse were fixed; however ambiguity fuels litigation and thus providing more clarity and reducing conflict may not be perceived as positive by certain stakeholders. Challenges Impairment is not synonymous with disability. Comparison of exceptionally abled (individuals with significant impairment, yet dynamic with their lives) vs. needlessly disabled (individuals with minimal or no impairment, yet perceive themselves as disabled and victimized) provides insights to both empowerment and to inherent problems with our workers’ compensation and disability systems. Experience has shown that disability relates more to perception than measurable impairment. A paradigm shift is required to reinforce a change in behavior and actions that are beneficial to patients. Erroneous Impairment Ratings In decades past we accepted what physicians did as being right, since they were “doctors”. Later, we learned that not all care was appropriate, and thus there was the need for practice guidelines, utilization review and bill review. More recently the severity of problems with erroneous impairment ratings is being recognized. Most impairment assessments are done incorrectly resulting in erroneous and typically inflated impairment ratings. A skilled expert evaluator may review impairment ratings to determine if a rating is done correctly by reassessing the provided clinical information using the procedures defined in the Guides. Review of 3756 cases nationally in 2007 to 2009 by Impairment Resources, LLC (www.impairment.com) revealed that 76% of the ratings were incorrect and the original rating averaged 20.9%, however it should have averaged 8.1%. Thus, approximately three fourth of all ratings are wrong and typically rated two and a half times higher than appropriate. In California the estimated inflated cost averages approximately $18,000 per case. Solutions to Impairment Rating Management The high costs (human and financial) resulting from erroneous impairment ratings may be prevented, resulting in a superb return on investment. Manage impairment ratings as you manage other issues: defining best practice strategies, assuring accuracy and efficiency, using data for total quality improvement and not tolerating mediocrity or fraud. Early in the claims cycle it is important to identify claims likely to result in impairment (permanent partial disability), determine probable date of maximal medical improvement (MMI) and for reserving purposes determine the probable impairment. At MMI provide guidance to the physician on how to perform an accurate rating and enlist them in the goal a reliable, unbiased, efficient rating. When a rating is received, use dedicated experts on the Guides to audit and critique ratings. Given the complexity of the Guides, the medical issues involved and the fact that the vast majority of physicians are unable to provide a correct rating, it is inappropriate to expect a claims adjuster to be able to identify which ratings are correct and to rerate those that are incorrect. If a rating is erroneous, manage the error. The first step is to provide feedback to the physician and an opportunity to correct the rating. If this is not successful than other strategies are considered, which may include developing an effective cross examination of that physician, providing the expert report as evidence, providing expert testimony and negotiation. The review of all impairment ratings not only assures accurate ratings on each case, it also provides data essential for total quality improvement. Summary It is imperative to recognize and manage the challenge of erroneous impairment ratings. Recognition and management of root causes for erroneous ratings results in improved accuracy, decreased conflict, reduced costs (human and financial) and prompter case resolution. The goal of all stakeholders should be avoiding needless impairment and disability, and maximizing human potential. A more detailed summary of Dr. Brigham’s presentation is available at: www.impairment.com/Media/Pdf/ncsi-2009amaguides.pdf Dr. Brigham may be reached at [email protected] Pictures from the 2009 Annual Meeting