TITLE

Billing and insurance-related administrative costs in United States' health care: synthesis of micro-costing evidence

AUTHOR(S)
Jiwani, Aliya; Himmelstein, David; Woolhandler, Steffie; Kahn, James G.
PUB. DATE
December 2014
SOURCE
BMC Health Services Research;2014, Vol. 14 Issue 1, p39
SOURCE TYPE
Academic Journal
DOC. TYPE
Article
ABSTRACT
Background The United States? multiple-payer health care system requires substantial effort and costs for administration, with billing and insurance-related (BIR) activities comprising a large but incompletely characterized proportion. A number of studies have quantified BIR costs for specific health care sectors, using micro-costing techniques. However, variation in the types of payers, providers, and BIR activities across studies complicates estimation of system-wide costs. Using a consistent and comprehensive definition of BIR (including both public and private payers, all providers, and all types of BIR activities), we synthesized and updated available micro-costing evidence in order to estimate total and added BIR costs for the U.S. health care system in 2012. Methods We reviewed BIR micro-costing studies across healthcare sectors. For physician practices, hospitals, and insurers, we estimated the % BIR using existing research and publicly reported data, re-calculated to a standard and comprehensive definition of BIR where necessary. We found no data on % BIR in other health services or supplies settings, so extrapolated from known sectors. We calculated total BIR costs in each sector as the product of 2012 U.S. national health expenditures and the percentage of revenue used for BIR. We estimated added BIR costs by comparing total BIR costs in each sector to those observed in existing, simplified financing systems (Canadas single payer system for providers, and U.S. Medicare for insurers). Due to uncertainty in inputs, we performed sensitivity analyses. Results BIR costs in the U.S. health care system totaled approximately $471 ($330 ? $597) billion in 2012. This includes $70 ($54 ? $76) billion in physician practices, $74 ($58 ? $94) billion in hospitals, an estimated $94 ($47 ? $141) billion in settings providing other health services and supplies, $198 ($154 ? $233) billion in private insurers, and $35 ($17 ? $52) billion in public insurers. Compared to simplified financing, $375 ($254 ? $507) billion, or 80%, represents the added BIR costs of the current multi-payer system. Conclusions A simplified financing system in the U.S. could result in cost savings exceeding $350 billion annually, nearly 15% of health care spending.
ACCESSION #
100346396

 

Related Articles

  • Medicaid Under Assault.  // America;3/31/2008, Vol. 198 Issue 11, p5 

    The author reflects on the issues on the proposed regulation by the federal government that is seen as an attack on Medicaid, a health insurance program designed for low-income Americans in the U.S. The author said that the government is trying to change the division of budget cost of Medicaid,...

  • State's Evidence. Larkin, Howard // H&HN: Hospitals & Health Networks;Sep2007, Vol. 81 Issue 9, p48 

    The article discusses several factors that influence efforts by U.S. states to expand health insurance coverage. Restricted funding has limited enrollment in Utah's Primary Care Network to about 17,000 to 19,000 at any given time, and complex eligibility rules keep many applicants from...

  • THE SPIRALING COST OF HEALTH CARE.  // Health Care (Mason Crest);2007, p72 

    This chapter from the book "Health Care" discusses the spiraling cost of health care in the U.S. In 2005, according to government statistics, total health care spending reached $6,423 per person. And, driven by rising costs for medical services and the aging population, that figure is likely to...

  • Medicaid: Intergovernmental Transfers Have Facilitated State Financing Schemes: GAO-04-574T. Allen, Kathryn G. // GAO Reports;3/18/2004, p1 

    Medicaid, the federal-state health financing program for many of the nation's most vulnerable populations, finances health care for an estimated 53 million lowincome Americans, at a cost of $244 billion in 2002. Congress structured Medicaid as a shared fiduciary responsibility of the federal...

  • No Insurance Leads to Decreased Care, Increased Mortality.  // State News (Council of State Governments);Aug2005, Vol. 48 Issue 7, p8 

    Summarizes the report "Health Insurance, Treatment and Outcomes: Using Auto Accidents As Health Shocks," by the U.S. National Bureau of Economic Research. Difference in the health care spending of insured and uninsured in the country; Effect of insurance status on health care spending; Rates of...

  • Health care subsidy about to dry up. Lovett, Karen // New Hampshire Business Review;12/18/2009, Vol. 31 Issue 27, p28 

    The article offers information on the near end of stimulus funding for health care insurance in the U.S. It notes that Families U.S.A. released a report about the end of a stimulus subsidy that cuts health insurance costs for the unemployed temporarily. It states the subsidy which was to help 7...

  • A Sensible Idea. Barkey, Patrick M. // Indiana Business Magazine;Apr2007, Vol. 51 Issue 4, p6 

    The author reflects on health care financing in Indiana. He discusses that tax-favored treatment of employer-financed health-insurance benefits costs the federal government treasury more than it spends on Medicare. He added that it encourages the proliferation of insurance plans that covers...

  • Higher U.S. Spending Doesn't Equal Quality.  // Trustee;Jun2012, Vol. 65 Issue 6, p4 

    The article focuses on the higher spending on health care in the U.S. It states that the country does not provide better care although it spends more on health care than 12 other industrialized countries. It says that the higher spending does not appear to be explained by either higher...

  • Funding gap widens for personal care.  // Community Care;9/28/2006, Issue 1642, p12 

    The article reports on the gap in funding the cost of free personal care policy in Scotland in 2006. A number of councils in the country received a low funding from the Scottish executive. There are deficits in funding in North Lanarkshire, Edinburgh, South Lanarkshire, Aberdeen, Borders,...

Share

Read the Article

Courtesy of THE LIBRARY OF VIRGINIA

Sorry, but this item is not currently available from your library.

Try another library?
Sign out of this library

Other Topics