MR Microinsurance_2012_03_29.indd - International Labour ...
MR Microinsurance_2012_03_29.indd - International Labour ... MR Microinsurance_2012_03_29.indd - International Labour ...
146 Health insurance benefi ts of their HMI scheme, and ease the burden on providers to verify eligibility. Nevertheless, the healthcare provider still has an important role in managing fraud, and must be trained accordingly. Having an insurance liaison inside contracted health facilities entails a risk of internal fraud that needs to be heeded. For example, Microcare rotated nurses managing the liaison function at a healthcare provider to limit the potential for collusion. Microcare also experienced a reduction in claims of 30 per cent when a computerized check-in desk was introduced in a clinic. Th e reduction was attributed to a reduction in fraud, which could occur when uninsured persons accessed care using the name of an insured person. – requiring pre-authorization of high-cost services. A gate-keeping function to limit fraudulent healthcare utilization is especially important when providers receive fee-for-service payments (FMiA, UMSGF and Yeshasvini). Typically, the insured person must request an authorization from the scheme to access healthcare services. Rapid authorization is important for client satisfaction. Authorizations for emergency cases are usually given within 24 hours. When possible, a toll-free telephone/fax process can be implemented to speed up the process (FMiA and Yeshasvini). With advances in and more widespread availability of technology, internet-based options using mobile phones, computers or point of service devices are being introduced. Pre-authorization is not applicable to primary health care due to the high frequency of services and less clear criteria available for their use (e.g. when is it necessary to seek medical care for a headache?). – providing accurate lists of eligible clients to healthcare providers, which is critical for schemes with capitation payment. Th is strategy is simpler for HMI schemes that limit enrolment, e.g. to once a year, but more demanding for HMI schemes, such as GRET-SKY and CBHI, that maintain open enrolment. Both of these schemes have clear procedures and deadlines to ensure that eligibility data are provided to health facilities early each month. Box 6.5 Preventing fraud without photograph identifi cation After testing a smart card with photographs that could be used at a hospital’s intake desk, FMiA began a simpler identifi cation process that used national identity cards (NIC) with photographs. FMiA issued an insurance card without a photograph, and requested the insured to show his or her NIC at the time of admission. Th e risk of fraud remained for children, who have no NIC. In cases where a NIC had not been issued or was not available, birth certifi cates were requested. A thumbprint identifi cation system was considered, but ultimately not implemented due to the time and cost expected to obtain thumbprints for all members at the time of regis- tration. FMiA additionally managed fraud using a pre-authorization process and a “gate keeping” system with FMiA staff located at contracted hospitals. Source: Authors.
Third-party payment mechanisms in health microinsurance 6.2.3 Managing quality of care In addition to access and cost, the third dimension of standards relevant to setting up and managing a TPP mechanism is quality of care. Quality may be defined using both objective and subjective criteria, and can be measured with clinical indicators as well as non-clinical or service indicators. Clinical outcomes, such as infection rates, are examples of objective quality of care indicators. Since clinical outcome data and/or benchmarks are often not available, other criteria may be used as a next best alternative. For example, the credentials of healthcare providers are often evaluated as a proxy for clinical quality. Sometimes claims data can be mined to develop retrospective assessments of quality, using healthcare professionals to analyse treatment patterns. Service quality, defined by indicators such as hours of operation or scope of services offered, may also be measured. Subjective quality of care, sometimes referred to as the patient experience, typically reflects a patient’s view on the health care he or she has received. Subjective views may be measured through surveys or focus groups on a range of topics such as comfort of facilities, perceived attitudes of healthcare providers and value for money. HMI schemes require members to use a defined network of healthcare providers when they implement a TPP mechanism. Thus, poor quality of care provided at network facilities – whether real or perceived – can impair client retention and the reputation of the HMI scheme. As indicated in Table 6.3 above, HMI schemes that use capitation payment can be even more vulnerable to quality-of-care issues, as providers have a financial incentive to restrict care. Measuring quality of care To promote quality of care, HMI schemes must find objective ways to measure it (see Box 6.6). One way to do this is to compare the actual number and type of services (e.g. admissions per thousand clients, number of contracts to the primary healthcare provider per person per year, number of prescriptions per consultation, percentage of children immunized) to expected morbidity (sickness) and mortality (death) norms. Developing norms can be a challenge. Ultimately, with sufficient quality and quantity of data, the comparison should be possible. However, great care must be taken when interpreting the data because there can be many natural variations in clinical outcomes among patients. These variations may be explained, for example, by nutrition, education, sanitation, and occurrence of natural or man-made disasters. 147
- Page 117 and 118: Microinsurance and climate change M
- Page 119 and 120: Microinsurance and climate change B
- Page 121 and 122: Microinsurance and climate change C
- Page 123 and 124: Microinsurance and climate change -
- Page 125 and 126: Microinsurance and climate change -
- Page 127 and 128: Microinsurance and climate change -
- Page 129 and 130: Microinsurance and climate change 1
- Page 131 and 132: Microinsurance and climate change 4
- Page 133 and 134: II Health insurance
- Page 135 and 136: Innovations and barriers in health
- Page 137 and 138: Innovations and barriers in health
- Page 139 and 140: Innovations and barriers in health
- Page 141 and 142: Innovations and barriers in health
- Page 143 and 144: Innovations and barriers in health
- Page 145 and 146: Innovations and barriers in health
- Page 147 and 148: Innovations and barriers in health
- Page 149 and 150: Innovations and barriers in health
- Page 151 and 152: Innovations and barriers in health
- Page 153 and 154: Innovations and barriers in health
- Page 155 and 156: Th ird-party payment mechanisms in
- Page 157 and 158: Th ird-party payment mechanisms in
- Page 159 and 160: Th ird-party payment mechanisms in
- Page 161 and 162: Third-party payment mechanisms in h
- Page 163 and 164: Th ird-party payment mechanisms in
- Page 165 and 166: Th ird-party payment mechanisms in
- Page 167: Th ird-party payment mechanisms in
- Page 171 and 172: Th ird-party payment mechanisms in
- Page 173 and 174: Third-party payment mechanisms in h
- Page 175 and 176: Th ird-party payment mechanisms in
- Page 177 and 178: Third-party payment mechanisms in h
- Page 179 and 180: Willingness to pay for health micro
- Page 181 and 182: Willingness to pay for health micro
- Page 183 and 184: Willingness to pay for health micro
- Page 185 and 186: Willingness to pay for health micro
- Page 187 and 188: Willingness to pay for health micro
- Page 189 and 190: Willingness to pay for health micro
- Page 191 and 192: Willingness to pay for health micro
- Page 193 and 194: Willingness to pay for health micro
- Page 195: Willingness to pay for health micro
- Page 198 and 199: 176 8 Savings in microinsurance: Le
- Page 200 and 201: 178 Life insurance - Understanding
- Page 202 and 203: 180 Life insurance Finally, the stu
- Page 204 and 205: 182 Life insurance Max Vijay offere
- Page 206 and 207: 184 Life insurance 8.2.3 SBI Life
- Page 208 and 209: 186 Life insurance - Reward for pre
- Page 210 and 211: 188 Life insurance capacity, and co
- Page 212 and 213: 190 Life insurance and administrati
- Page 214 and 215: 192 Life insurance 2. A surrender t
- Page 216 and 217: 194 Life insurance be earned from o
146 Health insurance<br />
benefi ts of their HMI scheme, and ease the burden on providers to verify eligibility.<br />
Nevertheless, the healthcare provider still has an important role in managing<br />
fraud, and must be trained accordingly. Having an insurance liaison inside contracted<br />
health facilities entails a risk of internal fraud that needs to be heeded. For<br />
example, Microcare rotated nurses managing the liaison function at a healthcare<br />
provider to limit the potential for collusion. Microcare also experienced a reduction<br />
in claims of 30 per cent when a computerized check-in desk was introduced<br />
in a clinic. Th e reduction was attributed to a reduction in fraud, which could<br />
occur when uninsured persons accessed care using the name of an insured person.<br />
– requiring pre-authorization of high-cost services. A gate-keeping function to<br />
limit fraudulent healthcare utilization is especially important when providers<br />
receive fee-for-service payments (FMiA, UMSGF and Yeshasvini). Typically, the<br />
insured person must request an authorization from the scheme to access healthcare<br />
services. Rapid authorization is important for client satisfaction. Authorizations<br />
for emergency cases are usually given within 24 hours. When possible, a<br />
toll-free telephone/fax process can be implemented to speed up the process<br />
(FMiA and Yeshasvini). With advances in and more widespread availability of<br />
technology, internet-based options using mobile phones, computers or point of<br />
service devices are being introduced. Pre-authorization is not applicable to primary<br />
health care due to the high frequency of services and less clear criteria available<br />
for their use (e.g. when is it necessary to seek medical care for a headache?).<br />
– providing accurate lists of eligible clients to healthcare providers, which is<br />
critical for schemes with capitation payment. Th is strategy is simpler for HMI<br />
schemes that limit enrolment, e.g. to once a year, but more demanding for HMI<br />
schemes, such as GRET-SKY and CBHI, that maintain open enrolment. Both of<br />
these schemes have clear procedures and deadlines to ensure that eligibility data<br />
are provided to health facilities early each month.<br />
Box 6.5 Preventing fraud without photograph identifi cation<br />
After testing a smart card with photographs that could be used at a hospital’s intake<br />
desk, FMiA began a simpler identifi cation process that used national identity cards<br />
(NIC) with photographs. FMiA issued an insurance card without a photograph,<br />
and requested the insured to show his or her NIC at the time of admission. Th e risk<br />
of fraud remained for children, who have no NIC. In cases where a NIC had not<br />
been issued or was not available, birth certifi cates were requested. A thumbprint<br />
identifi cation system was considered, but ultimately not implemented due to the<br />
time and cost expected to obtain thumbprints for all members at the time of regis-<br />
tration. FMiA additionally managed fraud using a pre-authorization process and a<br />
“gate keeping” system with FMiA staff located at contracted hospitals.<br />
Source: Authors.