Banner

Article

Letter: Payer offers biased perspective on prior authorizations

A physician disagrees with the views of an insurance company spokesman regarding the need for prior authorizations.

In a recent edition of Medical Economics, you quote Edmund Pezalla, MD, of Aetna Inc. in a discussion regarding prior authorizations ("Prior authorizations: A payer's perspective," July 10, 2014).

He tells us that “until fairly recently most medical care was based on intuition and  guesswork.” I did not realize that I have been blundering in the dark for the last 20 years.

He also states that “we’re trying to make sure this is the right thing for the patient.” To think I imagined  that was my task. Clearly, patients need to be protected from my misguided ways.

The remainder of his remarks suggest that most physicians requests are for unusual or unproven tests. Ninety-nine percent of my applications are for CT [computerized tomography] or MRI [magnetic resonance imaging] scans, and precious few of these.

Apparently profit has no motive whatsoever in prior authorizations. 

I stand enlightened.

Russell Lee-Wood, MD
Barnesville, Ohio

 

Related Videos
The new standard for medical malpractice: A conversation with Daniel G. Aaron, M.D., J.D.
The new standard for medical malpractice: What to watch for
The new standard for medical malpractice: A step toward ending defensive medicine?
The new standard for medical malpractice: Can doctors be liable for doing what everyone else does?
The new standard for medical malpractice: What makes a clinical guideline legally defensible?
The new standard for medical malpractice: What it means for day-to-day practice
The new standard for medical malpractice: What changed?
The new standard for medical malpractice: Why the law just changed
Locum tenens physicians — Lisa Grabl © CHG Healthcare