Reimbursement impact of medicaid managed care organizations replacing standard medicaid

Abstract

Study objective: To evaluate the reimbursement difference for Medicaid managed care organization (MMCO) enrollees compared with Medicaid enrollees for emergency department patients with disease conditions that appear to meet the “prudent layperson” definition of an emergency medical condition. Methods: This study used a retrospective reimbursement review of computerized billing data of reimbursement denials for 4 procedures (using Current Procedural Terminology codes for endotracheal intubation, cardiopulmonary resuscitation, central line placement, and lumbar puncture) and 1 International Classification of Diseases, ninth revision condition (chest pain) on MMCO patients from 7 MMCOs compared with standard Medicaid patients presenting to 4 EDs during a 6-month period (January through June 1998). Exclusion criteria were late bills that did not allow at least 90 days for payment and bills submitted on behalf of patients that were not covered at the time of service by Medicaid or MMCO. Data were analyzed using Fisher’s exact test. Results: The total number of MMCO and Medicaid patients evaluated/total ED patients evaluated was 5,153/63,552 and 6,020/63,552, respectively. The number of nonreimbursed procedures/total number of procedures performed on MMCO and Medicaid patients was 35/93 and 14/88, respectively ( P <.05). The number of nonreimbursed chest pain patients/total chest pain patients evaluated for MMCO and Medicaid enrollees was 65/277 and 12/199, respectively ( P <.05). Conclusion: MMCOs reimburse significantly less than Medicaid does for ED patients with conditions that a prudent layperson would consider an emergency. [Irvin CB, Fox JM. Reimbursement impact of Medicaid managed care organizations replacing standard Medicaid. Ann Emerg Med. March 2000;35:287-290.]