Re: What’s Driving the New Florida PIP

[Guest guest]

Dr. Burke will be out of town through to early next week. He is not sure if he will have Internet access.

In the interim, from the Insurance research Council's website: http://www.insurance-research.org/about

Founded in 1977, the Insurance Research Council (IRC) is an independent, nonprofit research organization supported by leading property and casualty insurance companies and associations. It provides timely and reliable information based on extensive data collection and analyses, examining important public policy matters that affect insurers, customers, and the general public. IRC is devoted solely to research and the communication of its research findings. It does not, however, advocate public policy; nor does it directly influence specific legislative initiatives or engage in lobbying communications.

IRC takes justifiable pride in raising the level and quality of the debate about insurance matters, both nationally and at the state level. IRC's research is highly regarded for its quality and its relevance to important public policy discussions. In keeping with the IRC's goal to broaden the horizon of debate on important public policy issues, the results of its work products are used by a variety of organizations with whom it cooperates, and are widely publicized through the media.

Yet the real value of IRC research transcends public education and understanding of insurance. The body of work that IRC produces has been useful in advancing the insurance industry's views on a host of matters crucial to insurance companies and their policyholders, and to business owners and their employees. The insurance industry has come to rely upon the IRC for critically needed property-casualty studies that are not ordinarily undertaken by other research organizations. IRC reports are widely distributed to assist insurers and the general public in reaching sound decisions on legislative and regulatory issues. Its major studies each year provide facts pertaining to key industry challenges. Policy makers and opinion leaders can view its reports as objective guides to understanding issues.

If there is paranoia because of its name, then how credible is research that comes from University of Western States College of Chiropractic, or any other studies that bear the name of any institution? As Dr. Burke pointed out, studies from the IRC have been routinely used by many within the chiropractic profession to support or defend various positions. While the entity was formed by the insurance industry, its research reports are accept by a broad spectrum of professionals, including those in healthcare (and yes, chiropractors).

Dr. Burke and I have discussed the situation in Florida. Personally (and I believe Dr. Burke agrees), the new Florida law is dumb. It is an example of a "knee jerk" reaction to a bigger problem. The Florida Medical Association was against the law, fearing it would overwhelm the emergency rooms and urgent care facilities. I would suspect the belief of the sponsors of the Florida measure was the time element would limit costs, since the patient must seek treatment within so many days. There may be a backlash at some point; then again, maybe not.

Unfortunately, even this explanation will not satisfy some. I am not going to debate the issue. Dr. Burke presented some information that may have given insight into what caused the problem in Florida. He may wish to add some comments on his return.

Tom Freedland, DC

Posted by: "AboWoman@..." AboWoman@...

Wed Mar 28, 2012 6:09 pm (PDT)

,when I see a title listed as 'independent' and the name is 'Insurance Research Council'; I want more information. Who funds them? Why are they tied to Insurance companies at all if they're autonomous/indepenent?That puts the first question of validity in my mind. I would also want to see the stats on numbers of total provider types. I find it hard to believe that funneling all MVA patients into ER would save money. I've not seen a lot of ER docs who know how to treat the milder NMS complaints as well as DCs or PTs. By mild, I mean anything short of broken bones, lacerations and head trauma. I have seen coding prices with comparisons between fees for PT vs DC care however, only in ORegon. The DC prices for same services are reimbursed and charged at a much lower rate. The same is true of exercise therapy charges. When comparing up front costs of DC care with pain meds and anti-inflam meds, the meds are lower, however, if you look at long term effects, there is no comparison. DC care will win hands down compared to medication management of symptoms. In terms of productivity, return to work, lasting relief, drug addiction and drug side effects, I think DC care will win overwhelmingly when compared to ER treatment. SO I would like to see the study parameters. All that being said, I think we need to take a hard look at visit cost/state. I would want to see cost of living for the areas with parameters in those studies as well. Was there an adjustment for inflation? What's the comparison cost for other professions in the area treating similar type cases? I've had several patients over the years come to me after a high speed impact accident where they went to ER first. I was fairly surprised at the initial bill. SOme were over $10,000 for the single encounter. Personally, I'd be hard pressed to ever hit $10,000 on any total claim I've handled in 26 years of business. THis is an interesting perspective that we need to consider and I'm glad you brought it to our attns. Minga Guerrero DC

[Guest guest]



The IRC says it, "provides timely and reliable information based on extensive data collection and analyses."

So, I don't think this is a "shoot the messenger" situation...

I just think that whenever information, stats, data, or "facts," are presented (like in the case of Florida) people naturally want to know the source of that data, and the source of the data should be transparent...

Remember how Stan Long and SAIF cherry-picked and jury-rigged the data they used to show chiropractic claims were "more expensive" than medical claims...?

I think it natural and good that people want to know the source and veracity of data. (:-)

RR

Re: What’s Driving the New Florida PIP

Dr. Burke will be out of town through to early next week. He is not sure if he will have Internet access.

In the interim, from the Insurance research Council's website: http://www.insurance-research.org/about

Founded in 1977, the Insurance Research Council (IRC) is an independent, nonprofit research organization supported by leading property and casualty insurance companies and associations. It provides timely and reliable information based on extensive data collection and analyses, examining important public policy matters that affect insurers, customers, and the general public. IRC is devoted solely to research and the communication of its research findings. It does not, however, advocate public policy; nor does it directly influence specific legislative initiatives or engage in lobbying communications.

IRC takes justifiable pride in raising the level and quality of the debate about insurance matters, both nationally and at the state level. IRC's research is highly regarded for its quality and its relevance to important public policy discussions. In keeping with the IRC's goal to broaden the horizon of debate on important public policy issues, the results of its work products are used by a variety of organizations with whom it cooperates, and are widely publicized through the media.

Yet the real value of IRC research transcends public education and understanding of insurance. The body of work that IRC produces has been useful in advancing the insurance industry's views on a host of matters crucial to insurance companies and their policyholders, and to business owners and their employees. The insurance industry has come to rely upon the IRC for critically needed property-casualty studies that are not ordinarily undertaken by other research organizations. IRC reports are widely distributed to assist insurers and the general public in reaching sound decisions on legislative and regulatory issues. Its major studies each year provide facts pertaining to key industry challenges. Policy makers and opinion leaders can view its reports as objective guides to understanding issues.

If there is paranoia because of its name, then how credible is research that comes from University of Western States College of Chiropractic, or any other studies that bear the name of any institution? As Dr. Burke pointed out, studies from the IRC have been routinely used by many within the chiropractic profession to support or defend various positions. While the entity was formed by the insurance industry, its research reports are accept by a broad spectrum of professionals, including those in healthcare (and yes, chiropractors).

Dr. Burke and I have discussed the situation in Florida. Personally (and I believe Dr. Burke agrees), the new Florida law is dumb. It is an example of a "knee jerk" reaction to a bigger problem. The Florida Medical Association was against the law, fearing it would overwhelm the emergency rooms and urgent care facilities. I would suspect the belief of the sponsors of the Florida measure was the time element would limit costs, since the patient must seek treatment within so many days. There may be a backlash at some point; then again, maybe not.

Unfortunately, even this explanation will not satisfy some. I am not going to debate the issue. Dr. Burke presented some information that may have given insight into what caused the problem in Florida. He may wish to add some comments on his return.

Tom Freedland, DC

Posted by: "AboWoman@..." AboWoman@...

Wed Mar 28, 2012 6:09 pm (PDT)

,when I see a title listed as 'independent' and the name is 'Insurance Research Council'; I want more information. Who funds them? Why are they tied to Insurance companies at all if they're autonomous/indepenent?That puts the first question of validity in my mind. I would also want to see the stats on numbers of total provider types. I find it hard to believe that funneling all MVA patients into ER would save money. I've not seen a lot of ER docs who know how to treat the milder NMS complaints as well as DCs or PTs. By mild, I mean anything short of broken bones, lacerations and head trauma. I have seen coding prices with comparisons between fees for PT vs DC care however, only in ORegon. The DC prices for same services are reimbursed and charged at a much lower rate. The same is true of exercise therapy charges. When comparing up front costs of DC care with pain meds and anti-inflam meds, the meds are lower, however, if you look at long term effects, there is no comparison. DC care will win hands down compared to medication management of symptoms. In terms of productivity, return to work, lasting relief, drug addiction and drug side effects, I think DC care will win overwhelmingly when compared to ER treatment. SO I would like to see the study parameters. All that being said, I think we need to take a hard look at visit cost/state. I would want to see cost of living for the areas with parameters in those studies as well. Was there an adjustment for inflation? What's the comparison cost for other professions in the area treating similar type cases? I've had several patients over the years come to me after a high speed impact accident where they went to ER first. I was fairly surprised at the initial bill. SOme were over $10,000 for the single encounter. Personally, I'd be hard pressed to ever hit $10,000 on any total claim I've handled in 26 years of business. THis is an interesting perspective that we need to consider and I'm glad you brought it to our attns. Minga Guerrero DC

[Guest guest]

Yes, I have a copy of the original SAIF Corp 1988 data study in and highlight what was wrong with in, in my power point presentation for the House and Senate Business and Labor Committees which is where our Workers Comp bills have  been and will be heard in the 2013 legislative session. SAIF Corp’s then President Stanton Long keep spewing on the media that for injured workers to see a chiropractor vs. a medical doctor was twice as expensive that combined with operation “clean sweep†which wrongly charged 11 colleagues with fraud all of which were found not to have done so by the courts….meant to the lay folks via the smear campaign in the newspapers and on TV that we were twice as expensive because we chiropractors were all fraudulent…etc., etc. To see a medical (PCP) doctor costs on average $256 per claimTo see a chiropractor cost $706 per claim so we were said to be more than twice as expensive. However, the story that wasn’t told was the story that DCs are a “one stop shop†we perform our own hands on exam and treatments, take and read our own X-rays in house and perform all the physiotherapies when clinically indicated…. MDs don’t perform any hands on treatment in fact injured workers are lucky if they get a hands on exam that was the $256 case average.  However, what the MDs do is write prescriptions for drugs that is a direct medical cost which had a case average of $200 per claim.They also write prescriptions for physical therapy that case average was $550 per claim...and they send out for X-rays and have a medical radiologist read their films claim average for radiology $200 Hospital claim averages were $550 for non-surgical claims….. So subtracting even the hospital but just keeping it to MD (PCP) vs. DC their claim average was actually $1,206.00 vs. our $706 and guess who gave the better treatment for the buck….Don’t think I’m not going to keep telling this story over, and over and over…..at the capitol….. Cheers, Vern Saboe From: oregondcs [mailto:oregondcs ] On Behalf Of M. s, D.C.Sent: Thursday, March 29, 2012 5:08 PMTo: oregondcs Subject: Re: Re: What’s Driving the New Florida PIP  The IRC says it, " provides timely and reliable information based on extensive data collection and analyses. " So, I don't think this is a " shoot the messenger " situation... I just think that whenever information, stats, data, or " facts, " are presented (like in the case of Florida) people naturally want to know the source of that data, and the source of the data should be transparent... Remember how Stan Long and SAIF cherry-picked and jury-rigged the data they used to show chiropractic claims were " more expensive " than medical claims...? I think it natural and good that people want to know the source and veracity of data. (:-) RR Re: What’s Driving the New Florida PIP Dr. Burke will be out of town through to early next week. He is not sure if he will have Internet access. In the interim, from the Insurance research Council's website: http://www.insurance-research.org/about Founded in 1977, the Insurance Research Council (IRC) is an independent, nonprofit research organization supported by leading property and casualty insurance companies and associations. It provides timely and reliable information based on extensive data collection and analyses, examining important public policy matters that affect insurers, customers, and the general public. IRC is devoted solely to research and the communication of its research findings. It does not, however, advocate public policy; nor does it directly influence specific legislative initiatives or engage in lobbying communications.IRC takes justifiable pride in raising the level and quality of the debate about insurance matters, both nationally and at the state level. IRC's research is highly regarded for its quality and its relevance to important public policy discussions. In keeping with the IRC's goal to broaden the horizon of debate on important public policy issues, the results of its work products are used by a variety of organizations with whom it cooperates, and are widely publicized through the media.Yet the real value of IRC research transcends public education and understanding of insurance. The body of work that IRC produces has been useful in advancing the insurance industry's views on a host of matters crucial to insurance companies and their policyholders, and to business owners and their employees. The insurance industry has come to rely upon the IRC for critically needed property-casualty studies that are not ordinarily undertaken by other research organizations. IRC reports are widely distributed to assist insurers and the general public in reaching sound decisions on legislative and regulatory issues. Its major studies each year provide facts pertaining to key industry challenges. Policy makers and opinion leaders can view its reports as objective guides to understanding issues.If there is paranoia because of its name, then how credible is research that comes from University of Western States College of Chiropractic, or any other studies that bear the name of any institution? As Dr. Burke pointed out, studies from the IRC have been routinely used by many within the chiropractic profession to support or defend various positions. While the entity was formed by the insurance industry, its research reports are accept by a broad spectrum of professionals, including those in healthcare (and yes, chiropractors). Dr. Burke and I have discussed the situation in Florida. Personally (and I believe Dr. Burke agrees), the new Florida law is dumb. It is an example of a " knee jerk " reaction to a bigger problem. The Florida Medical Association was against the law, fearing it would overwhelm the emergency rooms and urgent care facilities. I would suspect the belief of the sponsors of the Florida measure was the time element would limit costs, since the patient must seek treatment within so many days. There may be a backlash at some point; then again, maybe not. Unfortunately, even this explanation will not satisfy some. I am not going to debate the issue. Dr. Burke presented some information that may have given insight into what caused the problem in Florida. He may wish to add some comments on his return. Tom Freedland, DC Posted by: " AboWoman@... " AboWoman@... Wed Mar 28, 2012 6:09 pm (PDT) ,when I see a title listed as 'independent' and the name is 'Insurance Research Council'; I want more information. Who funds them? Why are they tied to Insurance companies at all if they're autonomous/indepenent?That puts the first question of validity in my mind. I would also want to see the stats on numbers of total provider types. I find it hard to believe that funneling all MVA patients into ER would save money. I've not seen a lot of ER docs who know how to treat the milder NMS complaints as well as DCs or PTs. By mild, I mean anything short of broken bones, lacerations and head trauma. I have seen coding prices with comparisons between fees for PT vs DC care however, only in ORegon. The DC prices for same services are reimbursed and charged at a much lower rate. The same is true of exercise therapy charges. When comparing up front costs of DC care with pain meds and anti-inflam meds, the meds are lower, however, if you look at long term effects, there is no comparison. DC care will win hands down compared to medication management of symptoms. In terms of productivity, return to work, lasting relief, drug addiction and drug side effects, I think DC care will win overwhelmingly when compared to ER treatment. SO I would like to see the study parameters. All that being said, I think we need to take a hard look at visit cost/state. I would want to see cost of living for the areas with parameters in those studies as well. Was there an adjustment for inflation? What's the comparison cost for other professions in the area treating similar type cases? I've had several patients over the years come to me after a high speed impact accident where they went to ER first. I was fairly surprised at the initial bill. SOme were over $10,000 for the single encounter. Personally, I'd be hard pressed to ever hit $10,000 on any total claim I've handled in 26 years of business. THis is an interesting perspective that we need to consider and I'm glad you brought it to our attns. Minga Guerrero DC