This sounds pretty inefficient. 40% denial and 97% overturn rate. Imagine the amount of cost on each side associated with writing the appeal (hospital), responding to the appeal (Plan) and then reprocessing the claim as a result. The cost to do this isn't minimal and imagine the teams required on each side to do this level of work. I'm not against authorizations at all, they do have value - you can see a lot of variation that occurs by hospitals as it relates to an Inpatient admission vs outpatient ER visit or observation case. The cost differences can be dramatic based on those decisions but these costly inefficient transactions add cost to an already high cost healthcare system and consumers and employers pay the cost of this inefficiency. #processandworkflowmatters "At Duke, UHC denies payment for care 40% more than other national insurance carriers we contract with. Duke Health overturns 97% of these denials after significant effort (people, time and technology)," CEO Craig Albanese, MD, told Becker's. Duke employs 236 full-time workers to appeal all denials from payers, which is not in the spirit of partnering to provide value to beneficiaries, patients and communities, according to Dr. Albanese, who said UnitedHealthcare "has been 57% slower to pay claims than our other payers and takes over 60 days to respond to claims they deny."
Point of clarification: It’s not a 40% denial rate. All the denial rates are relatively low (the overwhelming number - more than 90% - are approved), but United is 40% more likely to deny than their peers. Lost in that number is that United has fewer services requiring approval. When an initial legitimate request is not approved, it’s almost always because the provider did not submit the supporting material specified in advance by the carrier. One way to improve efficiency is to submit the initial request correctly. I won’t claim the PA/PC system is a great one, but it’s frequently exaggerated by providers. Sadly, when left unchecked, wasteful healthcare is delivered at the expense of patients. Utikization management is a common practice because the savings outweigh the costs to administer.
It is absolutely mindbogling that Utilization Review was created within Medicare in 1970 and adopted into Employer Sponsored Insurance in 1980 to Contain Costs and in 2025; with 50 years of Healhcare Providers and Payers and numerous Patient Advocates; all it did, does and will do is increase Costs and be a great creator and sustainer of Jobs, Jobs, Jobs. Of course; Cost = Price × Utilization and the U in the equation has long been ignored by all Parties to focus 100% on the P. The irony is that every policy and plan document only covers Medically Apprppriate Care, which is the Cause of this fiasco, because No Medical Specialt Association, Medical College or the AMA will certify, per MPC, per CPT, what "Medically Appropriate" is so it can be Contracted. Great Post, but irrelevant to Change in 2025, 2026....See Wisconsin's BHCG Post on WHIO's PVS 3.0. There may be some hope for change...
Another piece of healthcare that just doesn’t make much sense.
A 40% denial rate with a 97% overturn shows clear inefficiency. The administrative cost on both sides is huge, and while authorizations have their place, this adds unnecessary strain to the system. Streamlining the process could help reduce costs and improve care for everyone involved.
plenty of companies to do this at a fraction of the cost using technology... someone needs to make a few calls and investigate the market
That is so a large deniles team
Great share, Michael Ruiz de Somocurcio
Actuary Helping ACOs Manage Insurance Risk in Value-Based Contracting
2mo"Duke employs 236 full-time workers to appeal all denials from payers" is that real!