More doctors are charging fees to respond to patient messages

Post by EVa5I7bHFq9mnYK » Sun, Mar 10, 2024, 7:03 AM UTC

stuckindoors wrote: post #124

CharlesW wrote: post #4

Here's American health care: • I needed refills for two prescriptions that I've been taking for years. This time, for opaque reasons, I needed to talk to a doctor first. • Fine, but I couldn't accommodate an in-person check-in. I chose a "video visit" that, due to logistics, I had to do while away from home. Because they were a half-hour late, I was effectively forced to do this from the couch of a Costco floor displ…

Just go to Mexico or an online pharmacy and get your meds at cost. /s The US healthcare system is completely broken. Hospital systems and doctors offices in general lost a shit ton of money last year. There has been massive layoffs throughout this sector. There will continue to be this year. This year they all are going to try to survive by recouping their prior losses. Get ready for more fees. In addition - there is…

Post by AbstractH24 » Sun, Mar 10, 2024, 12:55 PM UTC

wighty wrote: post #282

qudat wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I wonder if charging for these messages will make doctors more likely to respond. Physicians won't see a dime of that money unless it's through RVUs and even then it's marginal at best. The real money is in procedures.

There are some codes that can be used for asynchronous portal messages, but to be honest the AMA is still pretty broken as far as how much time we need to spend for things... the codes are 99421 (5-10 minutes over 7 days), 99422 (11-20 minutes), 99423 (21+). It is not clear to me how well these codes are actually paid for by private insurance. In a wRVU system a PCP may get paid like $5-13 for the first code, $15-30…

Post by codegeek » Sun, Mar 10, 2024, 1:41 PM UTC

BobaFloutist wrote: post #106

codegeek wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Talk to me when you get a $4000 bill for 2 hours in ER where the actual doc saw you for 5 mins and then the nurses did band-aid and over the counter burn ointment. This with Insurance (biggest mafia). AMerican Healthcare system baby!!

I mean I'm not sure that you shouldn't be charged ER prices for taking an over-the-counter-treatable injury to the ER. You probably shouldn't be charged 4000 for going to the ER, but just because you didn't actually need to go to the ER doesn't mean you didn't consume ER resources (the 24/7 staffing, the intake logistics, the trauma expertise, etc). Probably the biggest surprise there is that a doctor saw you at all…

Post by AbstractH24 » Sun, Mar 10, 2024, 2:00 PM UTC

BobaFloutist wrote: post #118

freeAgent wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is basically scenario #2 (which is common), but for whatever reason they haven’t been very successful at pushing back against some of the changes that cause these issues. I don’t have much insight to offer there since I’m not at the negotiating table there.

I mean I think the answer is that good doctors do form employee-owned co-ops, which are often very successful and establish a great deal of trust in their community, but then when the time comes for them to retire they very understandably cash out and sell to the private organizations that proceed to run them for profit first. I've been playing with the idea for a while that any time a company uses its name, it has t…

Post by whiterknight » Sun, Mar 10, 2024, 3:15 PM UTC

dillydogg wrote: post #357

whiterknight wrote: post #354

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interesting. If you had to weight it towards legal compliance or productivity surveillance which would you say?

Maybe letting them see patients? I feel like this is a false dichotomy. I guess legal compliance of I had to choose, so it wouldn't lead to insane numbers of patients per hour