Doctors angered by insurers' rating systems

updated 5:41 p.m. ET Feb. 7, 2007

NEW YORK - A less confident physician might have been humbled by the letters Dr. Mike Kelly received last year from two insurers.

Regence BlueShield and UnitedHealthcare informed Kelly that he failed to qualify for their respective designations as a high-quality doctor. Health insurers are increasingly rating doctors and often charge patients a lower co-payment to see those they deem exceptional providers.

"I did doubt myself initially when I got the letters," said Kelly, a family physician in practice outside Tacoma, Wash., who is now suing Regence over its program. "But eventually I realized I didn't do anything wrong and I felt, 'How dare they do this?' I think it is all about money. They just want networks of doctors that don't spend a lot of money."

That's false, insist insurers such as UnitedHealth Group Inc., Cigna Corp., Aetna Inc. and WellPoint Inc. which all either started or expanded their physician quality ranking programs this year. They said the programs are an attempt to help employers struggling with ever-rising health-care costs to ensure that their money is well spent.

"We believe consumers should have information and access to all their doctors but we want to (give them incentives) to go to high quality providers," said Dr. Jeffrey Kang, senior vice president and chief medical officer at Cigna. Such products can lower health care costs by 3 percent to 5 percent, he said.

Cigna expanded its program, which charges lower co-payments, to 42 new markets this year, for a total of 58. Aetna rates 12 different specialties in 27 different markets, up from 6 specialties in three markets three years ago; some employers do offer lower copayments based on quality. Meanwhile, this marks the first year Wellpoint is offering employers a rating system.

Employers have expressed interest in such plans but are hesitant because of the lack of universally accepted quality measures, said Blaine Bos, a partner at Mercer Health & Benefits LLC. Last year, only 9 percent of employers with 500 or more employees had program that tiered doctors by quality, according to a study by Mercer.

Insurers deny accusations
Many physicians suspect insurers' motivation and some are fighting the programs. The American Medical Association along with several doctors sued Regence BlueShield last year, claiming libel and deceptive business practices. The program has since been discarded, but the suit is continuing. Meanwhile, late last year Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Texas agreed to postpone listing doctors' rankings on its Web site after physicians cried foul.

"We're concerned that as insurers try to maximize profits they are saying that the doctor that charges the least amount of money is the highest quality," said Dr. Jim Rohack, a cardiologist who is an AMA board member.

Insurers deny such accusations, noting they use a combination of cost and quality measures developed from information from medical societies and the federal government.

Data doesn't tell the whole story
Doctors say part of the problem is that the measures are applied to patients' claim data — information they say only tells half a story. Such data will display what tests or services a patient had but doesn't disclose what a doctor ordered.

For example, an insurer may look at an older female patient's claims data and see that she hasn't had a mammogram _ information that would reflect badly on a doctor. But that record won't show that the patient simply refuses to get a mammogram.

Insurers concede that claims data is not perfect and that sometimes records can be incorrectly coded.

Kelly said Regence criticized him for not taking good care of diabetes patients but one-third of the patients it cited didn't even have the disease.

"They (insurance executives) get six figure salaries to throw bombs in our way," said Dr. Michael Schiesser, an internist with a practice in Bellevue, Wash., who is also suing Regence.

Two years ago, he said Regence sent him a $5,000 check for his performance but last year excluded him from the high-quality network. The reward could have been the mistake, but either way it shows the programs aren't well designed, Schiesser said.

MORE FROM HEALTH CARE

Health care Section Front

Alabama doctor picked for surgeon general   Report: VA inadequately serving women   FDA: Infections linked to transplant drugs Obama: Don't bet against us on health care 'Individual mandate' key to universal health coverage Judge denies bail for Colo. hospital worker Dems edge away from health care deadline Survey: Americans worried about cancer costs Paperless health care? A hospital's long journey Doctors look to profit from ‘no insurance’ clinic Health care Section Front   Add Health care headlines to your news reader: