The study outlines that the Massachusetts
health care reform shares many similarities with the ACA. The author
reviewed the implementation of the health care reform law and the number of
reported workplace injuries to provide an insight to how the ACA might affect
workers’ compensation rates. The study
found a reduction in hospital care by 5-10% in workers’ compensation billing
after the Massachusetts‘s
health care reform took effect.
While acknowledging limitations due to the available data, the author
takes through steps to control for variables such as the Great Recession. The article was well written and the
conclusions based on the available data are quite reasonable. Overall the
article was a great read and fascinating study. I agreed with the conclusion
that that an increase in health insurance among those employed will reduce
workers’ compensation rates.
I remained cognizant of my bias while
reading The Rand Corporation’s study and tried to poke some holes in it. The
first finding was a notable reduction in workers’ compensation emergency room
visits. I was certain the study would
find a drop in emergency room visits however the skeptical streak inherent in
risk managers caused me to raise a couple of concerns with the author’s analysis. Most of the data on the reduction in workers’
compensation billings came from hospital emergency room admissions. I have noticed that some employers in Oregon
have been urging injured employees to go to anywhere but the emergency room due
to the cost of emergency room care. When
I review claim costs it seems like an emergency room visit adds on a zero onto the
medical bill when compared to urgent care or a doctor’s office. It is against the law in Oregon to limit an
injured worker’s choice of medical providers but employers push the
boundaries. For example, in the
Eugene/Springfield area there is a service where an emergency medical technician
will come out to the jobsite and see if first aid can be administered. If first aid is insufficient they will take
the injured employee to any doctor within a certain number of miles. I suspect
that emergency room prices have risen universally throughout the nation, including
Massachusetts, and that many employers try to control this cost by directing
care. The second question that arose was the author’s reliance on hospital data
as there are many providers that treat workers’ compensation injuries outside
of a hospital. Ideally I would have
liked to see other sources of data to corroborate the author’s finding. Of course some data, like from a workers’
compensation carrier, may not have been accessible. Another option for data is
from the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). OSHA randomly
picks employers to provide OSHA 300 information. The idea is that all employers in the United
States report data using a national standard on the 300 Form so OSHA can track
injuries via a Days Away, Restricted or Transferred (DART) rate. Comparing DART
rates which controls for the number of hours worked would be a fascinating secondary
source of data to confirm or contrast the study’s conclusions.
There
is certainly room to question if workers’ compensation rates will begin a
downward trend once the ACA goes into effect.
We can only speculate on the effectiveness of the combination of
penalties and incentives from the ACA in getting uninsured Americans to buy
insurance or if the primary effect of this new law will be an expansion of
Medicaid. The level of adoption may
have a pronounced effect on future workers’ compensation rates.
Although
it can be argued there were limitations with the study, I have not changed my original
preconception. When I go back and think
of my initial example of the injured worker with a hernia, I reach the same
conclusion. It is easy to imagine a
worker with health insurance who was not injured on the job having an avenue to
obtain treatment and deciding not to file a workers’ compensation claim.
No comments:
Post a Comment