Cyber Visits
Two insurance companies may begin paying doctors for cyber visits.There have been a few insurers paying doctors for the so-called “virtual visits” if they were conducted through secure electronic messaging systems but it was on a limited basis.
Cigna and Aetna announced in December that they were reimbursing online visits on a nationwide basis beginning in 2008 as long as the services were performed through RelayHealth.
Cigna will pay $25 for a typical online consultation and $35 for more complicated consultations but Aetna has not announced what it will pay.
Patients would pay his or her usual co-pay online at the RelayHealth website with a credit card and the insurer would pay the remainder of the charge.
Physicians must subscribe to RelayHealth (http://www.relayhealth.com/) at a cost of $100 a month.
The online consultation involves a structured interview with all communications between doctor and patient encrypted and password-protected.
The online service also allows patients to request appointments, prescription renewals, and referrals as well as view lab results.
Are patients willing to pay for this service and are physicians willing to pay the $100/month fee.
Time will tell.
Labels: healthcare, insurance, internet
posted by Anonymous at 5:50 AM
8 Comments:
Dr. Dan, is this entry just a comment and for information only to the public? Or are you doing an informal survey as a litmus indicator as to the reception of the public to this concept? Just curious.
Dr. Dan, is the comment on 2/25 correct? Has your family really becoming investors in the new doctor's hospital?
I find that hard to believe. I always thought that you were on our side.
How can I invest in the new hospital? Is the investment opportunity open to the public? When is the projected opening of the facility?
In response to anonymous 8:21, I say. If I recall, Dr. Dan himself was invested in the new hospital, but got out when his role changed at FMH...because he viewed it as a conflict of interest. Is there a possibility his family is just "holding" his investment for him until he can diplomatically and ethically buy back in? What say you, Dr. Dan, am I on target?
I can say with certainty that Dr. Dan nor anyone in his family or practice is investors in the new hospital.
It is not open to the general public for investment although it would be a very good return on your dollar.
A poster wrote: "Is there a possibility his family is just "holding" his investment for him until he can diplomatically and ethically buy back in?"
That doesn't sound very "ethical" to me. It sounds like Clintonesque move to mask what is really going on. I would consider it a major breach of trust if Dr. Dan (via his family) has a financial stake in a Floyd Memorial competitor while he is serving in a leadership position at Floyd.
Yawn.
Nothing like a bunch of anonymous fools throwing mud on the wall to see what sticks.
HB and I often see the world very differently, but even I shake my head at the patheticism of the anonymous barbs.
How silly.
Either it is true or it is not. Dr. Dan can easily clear this up in a straightforward non-evasive way.
Interesting reading this afternoon.
To be very clear:
I have no financial interest, investment or holdings of any sort in the new hospital.
There is no one in my family, my friends, aquaintances etc. that have any investment and is just holding it for me.
I had the opportunity to invest more than a year or so and declined, as did my partners.
Hope this clears the air.
Post a Comment
<< Home