Survey shows For-profits less satisfactory
A national customer-satisfaction survey recently found that consumers would be better off with privately held health insurance companies rather than publicly traded giants like UnitedHealth Group, whose national presence is set to grow, yet again, with its $2.6 billion bid to purchase Las Vegas-based Sierra Health Services. Many in the Las Vegas area where this acquisition is to take place have major concerns and are very wary because they know from experience it will disrupt service, payments, and create an overall decline in satisfaction amongst patients and providers.
But consumers don’t usually have much choice in health insurers as they remain at the mercy of their employers who typically purchases insurance from the lowest bidder. Entities like these giants can underbid virtually everyone else in the area until they can no longer survive financially.
J.D. Power & Associates, in its first national consumer survey of big health-insurance plans, found that customers give “notably higher” grades to private, not-for-profit insurers like Harvard Pilgrim Health Care, and independent Blues plans than they do investor-owned giants like UnitedHealth or Aetna. These healthcare giants received the lowest scores of any of the 13 companies surveyed in the region.
The average overall national score was 739 and several large, publicly traded insurers fell well below that benchmark. The survey showed Aetna scored just a 698 in the West while UnitedHealthcare scored only 729 which are well below the national average. Privately held companies consistently were the high scorers in all geographical locations.
Healthcare in the United States will continue to be problematic if giants such as these are allowed to remain unhindered all while placing more and more restrictions on patients and providers. Their continued denials, restrictions, and rules allow them to practice medicine without the same risk of consequences. Stock holders remain their primary interest.
But consumers don’t usually have much choice in health insurers as they remain at the mercy of their employers who typically purchases insurance from the lowest bidder. Entities like these giants can underbid virtually everyone else in the area until they can no longer survive financially.
J.D. Power & Associates, in its first national consumer survey of big health-insurance plans, found that customers give “notably higher” grades to private, not-for-profit insurers like Harvard Pilgrim Health Care, and independent Blues plans than they do investor-owned giants like UnitedHealth or Aetna. These healthcare giants received the lowest scores of any of the 13 companies surveyed in the region.
The average overall national score was 739 and several large, publicly traded insurers fell well below that benchmark. The survey showed Aetna scored just a 698 in the West while UnitedHealthcare scored only 729 which are well below the national average. Privately held companies consistently were the high scorers in all geographical locations.
Healthcare in the United States will continue to be problematic if giants such as these are allowed to remain unhindered all while placing more and more restrictions on patients and providers. Their continued denials, restrictions, and rules allow them to practice medicine without the same risk of consequences. Stock holders remain their primary interest.
Labels: healthcare, satisfaction, United Healthcare
posted by Anonymous at 5:57 AM
6 Comments:
The drive for increasing profits can only come from decreasing the delivery of health services. That simple fact will drive the public towards a single payor system. We might as well accept this eventuality and make the best of it.
So why don't these non-profit regional organizations expand nationally and wipe Unitedhealth, Anthem, Humana and Aetna off the map? It should be easy to do if consumers so overwhelming prefer them.
HB,
I have no great love for some of these companies either but your definition of "well below" is different than mine.
The nation average is 739. United was 729. It is below but "well below"? It is less than 1 1/2% difference. You also did not mention that this is a scale of 1,000. That is leaving out a very important fact.
Let's look at it as school. Your friend got a 74 on a test. You got a 73. Are you "well below" intelligence wise than your friend? The very best score that I saw(after going to the J.D. Power site) was 785. The valedictorian got a 79 on their "test".
Hey, no fair! HB reserves the right to spin "facts" and numbers any way he wants in order to make a point.
"But consumers don’t usually have much choice in health insurers as they remain at the mercy of their employers who typically purchases insurance from the lowest bidder." Only a physician who quite obviously lives well above the means of your average worker could make the above state. Hello Dr. Dan! The rest of us can't afford private insurance, never could, never will. I for one am grateful for the insurance my employer (FMHHS) provides me. Furthermore can you imagine what it would cost employers for them to provide options in different carriers to their employees? It would atronomical. And why wouldn't an employer purchase insurance at the lowest bid? Doctors have always failed to see that administrations are not made of money and they do have a bottom line they have to meet. It is a standard rule that all of us who work in hospitals understand. If a doctor is paying for it, it better be the cheapest he can get it. If administration is paying for it, the sky's the limit.
What was that all about?
Post a Comment
<< Home