<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Life in the Trenches</title>
	<atom:link href="http://healthblog.ncpa.org/life-in-the-trenches/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://healthblog.ncpa.org/life-in-the-trenches/</link>
	<description>Health Care Policy and Reform Insights &#124; NCPA</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 24 May 2012 19:14:04 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Chris</title>
		<link>http://healthblog.ncpa.org/life-in-the-trenches/comment-page-1/#comment-42447</link>
		<dc:creator>Chris</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 08 May 2009 19:26:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.john-goodman-blog.com/?p=3298#comment-42447</guid>
		<description>I understand the scenario you are describing and the level of bureaucratic frustration it creates, but I don&#039;t think you really understand that the current situation is worse. Medical records are required by payers to be used for billing now, and the need to send a corrected record is problematic, as are many other situations in this manual process. The insurance companies seem to have little interest in making it run smoother, and hospitals and doctors offices are focused on other aspects of their profession. The process often forces claims to revert to paper when a copy of the record is required to be attached (stapled). Paper claims are less accurate and efficient and take up to 3 times longer to be paid if they do process correctly. And a photocopy of the medical record is in no way superior to an electronic version.

Electronic claims will be fundamentally less bureaucratic than the current paper versions, but there will still be issues created by the lack of good procedures at either the providers or the payers.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I understand the scenario you are describing and the level of bureaucratic frustration it creates, but I don&#8217;t think you really understand that the current situation is worse. Medical records are required by payers to be used for billing now, and the need to send a corrected record is problematic, as are many other situations in this manual process. The insurance companies seem to have little interest in making it run smoother, and hospitals and doctors offices are focused on other aspects of their profession. The process often forces claims to revert to paper when a copy of the record is required to be attached (stapled). Paper claims are less accurate and efficient and take up to 3 times longer to be paid if they do process correctly. And a photocopy of the medical record is in no way superior to an electronic version.</p>
<p>Electronic claims will be fundamentally less bureaucratic than the current paper versions, but there will still be issues created by the lack of good procedures at either the providers or the payers.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bruce</title>
		<link>http://healthblog.ncpa.org/life-in-the-trenches/comment-page-1/#comment-42436</link>
		<dc:creator>Bruce</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 07 May 2009 20:41:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.john-goodman-blog.com/?p=3298#comment-42436</guid>
		<description>The problem is that we keep tryng to solve the problems of a bureaucracy with more bureaucracy instead of with market based insititutions.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The problem is that we keep tryng to solve the problems of a bureaucracy with more bureaucracy instead of with market based insititutions.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John R. Graham</title>
		<link>http://healthblog.ncpa.org/life-in-the-trenches/comment-page-1/#comment-42434</link>
		<dc:creator>John R. Graham</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 07 May 2009 20:32:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.john-goodman-blog.com/?p=3298#comment-42434</guid>
		<description>Although not exactly the topic Linda is addressing, it strikes me that Government could get doctors to buy into state-mandated health IT if adhering to the protocols minimized or eliminated med-mal liability.  This would risk swinging the pendulum away from today&#039;s environment of &quot;jackpot justice&quot; too far to the other side, where patients have few or no legal rights.  It&#039;s something that we should keep an eye out for.  The Obama regime is not going to get doctors to buy into its health IT agenda without a big carrot.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Although not exactly the topic Linda is addressing, it strikes me that Government could get doctors to buy into state-mandated health IT if adhering to the protocols minimized or eliminated med-mal liability.  This would risk swinging the pendulum away from today&#8217;s environment of &#8220;jackpot justice&#8221; too far to the other side, where patients have few or no legal rights.  It&#8217;s something that we should keep an eye out for.  The Obama regime is not going to get doctors to buy into its health IT agenda without a big carrot.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ken</title>
		<link>http://healthblog.ncpa.org/life-in-the-trenches/comment-page-1/#comment-42424</link>
		<dc:creator>Ken</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 07 May 2009 17:32:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.john-goodman-blog.com/?p=3298#comment-42424</guid>
		<description>This is just the beginning, Linda. Things are going to get worse. Much worse.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This is just the beginning, Linda. Things are going to get worse. Much worse.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

