> Judah wrote: > But if you want cost savings, insurance is still the low hanging > fruit.
Really? How so? Give some specific examples. And the study you present is simply saying "there is overhead in processing claims" and doesn't seem to mention anything about what the providers are doing to lower their overhead. Also are they comparing apples-to-apples? i.e., similar physicians in similar regions, with similar membership, with similar practice management software, and well trained medical coders and support staff? It sounded like just a random survey to me which is anecdotal and therefore Judah-bane. So what is this low hanging fruit? Are you saying that the federal government will make claims processing more efficient? Is that because you'd assume fewer plans? Cause if you have automated claims submission the number of plans is irrelevant; claim is paid or not. So that wouldn't be a driver ... But even if it were, wouldn't the impact on patient outcome be dependent on the plan? In other words, if we change the plan and how doctor's are paid and how they can profit and what services they cover aren't we now impacting how patients are treated which would directly impact outcome? Tell me more about this low hanging fruit, cause it doesn't sound like fruit, but it does sound low hanging. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Want to reach the ColdFusion community with something they want? Let them know on the House of Fusion mailing lists Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:298323 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
