Showing posts with label consumers. Show all posts
Showing posts with label consumers. Show all posts

Monday, 16 May 2016

Princess Health and Health-care consumers get little help resolving complaints, columnist says, citing some horrific examples. Princessiccia

By Trudy Lieberman
Rural Health News Service

Who protects consumers of health care?

Two recent emails from readers got me thinking about that question. I don�t mean consumers in their role as patients whose medical well-being is looked after by state medical boards and health departments that police doctors and hospitals. Those organizations don�t always do a perfect job protecting patients from harm, but at least they are in place.

But who protects patients when things go wrong on health care�s financial side? What happens when you receive a bill you didn�t expect and can�t afford to pay? What happens when insurers send unintelligible explanations of benefits you can�t understand? What about questionable loan arrangements to avoid medical bankruptcy? Consumers of health care are pretty much on their own.

From the 1960s though the 1980s when people complained, they got action from consumer organizations, government and even businesses that set up departments to handle complaints. That consumer movement is now but a flicker.

�We don�t have as many public-interest minded regulators, and officials who try to grab these issues by the horns and deal with them,� says Chuck Bell, director of programs for Consumers Union.

The emails I received show that although it�s an uphill battle to get redress, fighting back as an individual can get attention and may ultimately lead to better protections for everyone.

John Rutledge, a retiree, got snared in Medicare�s three-day rule by a hospital near his hometown Wheaton, Ill. At the end of March he took his wife, who was having breathing problems, to the hospital where she was held for three nights of �observation.� Patients must be in a hospital for three days as an in-patient before they are entitled to Medicare benefits for 100 days of skilled nursing home care, as I noted in a recent column.

Thousands of families have been caught when hospitals decide their loved ones are admitted for �observation,� a tactic that allows them to avoid repaying Medicare if government auditors find patients should not have been classified as �in-patients.� Playing the �observational� game is worth millions to hospitals but costs families tens of thousands of dollars when someone doesn�t qualify for Medicare-covered skilled nursing care.

Rutledge knew about the three-day rule. Both his doctor and a pulmonologist at the same medical practice recommended an in-patient stay, and Rutledge refused to sign a hospital document saying his wife was admitted for observation. Still, the hospital prevailed, claiming a consultant made the decision to keep her for �observation.�

Rutledge was stuck with a bill that, so far, totals over $15,000 for the skilled nursing care his wife did need. He said he had been a �significant donor� to the hospital foundation, and �I have told the foundation that what I spend as a result of �observation� will come out of what I planned to give them, starting with the annual gift.�

The second email came from Kathryn Green, a college history professor who lives in Greenwood, Miss. Green is fighting an air-ambulance company, which transported her late husband to a Jackson hospital after he suffered a fatal fall in their home. This �nightmare,� as she calls it, is a bill from the transport company that claims it�s outside her insurance network, and says she owes them $50,950.

�I am 63 and will have a devastated retirement if this is upheld,� Green told me.

Blue Cross & Blue Shield of Mississippi, the administrator for her insurance carrier the State and School Employees� Health Insurance Plan, paid $7,192 of the $58,142 the transport company billed. Blue Cross has told Green that she should be held harmless and should not be charged for the �balance after payment of the Allowable Charge has been made directly to that provider.�

Green is raising a ruckus and has taken her case to state and national media, members of Congress, the state attorney general, and the Mississippi Health Advocacy Program. The company has told her it will begin collection efforts.

In both cases there�s a legislative solution. The three-day rule can be fixed by counting all the time a patient spends in the hospital whether they�re classified as an �in� or as an �observational� patient. The ambulance problem can be fixed by changing the 1978 airline deregulation law that prevents states from interfering with fares, services, and routes. But money and politics block the federal changes that would help people like Rutledge and Green.

�It�s like playing a game of health-insurance roulette,� Bell says. �Your coverage exposes you to these gaps that have been normalized. It�s become the way of doing business.� A resurgent consumer movement could change all that.

What consumer problems have you had with balance billing? Write to trudy.lieberman@gmail.com.

Wednesday, 13 April 2016

Princess Health and Peanut butter can be a healthy choice, but you have to read the labels; gimmicks to improve taste not the best for nutrition. Princessiccia

Peanut butter has long been considered a healthy food choice, and for the most part it still is, but with the advent of low-fat brands, flavored peanut butters and companies adding preservatives to lengthen shelf life, not all peanut butters are equally nutritious, Jose Aguayo and Ryan Canavan report for the Environmental Working Group.

Originally, peanut butter was made from one ingredient: ground roasted peanuts. But now, commercial brands have added sugars, salt, hydrogenated oils and other preservatives, and some are less acceptable than others.

For example, "reduced-fat peanut butters are some of the worst offenders," the authors write. To reduce the fat calories, manufacturers will often take out the healthy monosaturated fats but then add sugar and salt to improve the taste.

Most commercial brands also add hydrogenated oils, as well as preservatives like potassium sorbate, to extend peanut butter's shelf life. The authors note that over 80 percent of peanut-butter brands have hydrogenated oils, which introduce "artery-clogging saturated and trans fats to peanut butter's otherwise-healthy fat profile."

"For a healthy heart, the American Heart Association recommends avoiding foods with hydrogenated oils, including peanut butter," the authors write. So, read the labels when choosing a peanut butter to determine which ones have the least salt, sugar, hydrogenated oils and preservatives, remembering that the healthiest peanut butters are made from just ground roasted peanuts and a pinch of salt.

It should also be noted that while peanut butter can be a healthy choice, it is high in calories and should be eaten in moderation. A standard serving of peanut butter is 2 tablespoons, which is about the size of a golf ball. This amount has about 190 calories.