Insurance Companies Say PRP Is Experimental…We Sigh

Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injections first presented in the orthopedic medical literature in 2004, nearly 20 years ago. Now, new PRP studies hit the orthopedic journals monthly. The overwhelming majority of the evidence suggests that PRP injections are safe, beneficial and have positive effects on soft tissue and joints. Somehow though, insurance companies continue to classify these as “experimental” and will not pay for PRP injections. Thus, these remain cash-pay procedures. PRP injections are not alone, as some of the best procedures now in medicine are not covered by insurance.

PRP is not just used in orthopedics, but also in dentistry, ENT, neurosurgery, ophthalmology, urology, wound healing, cosmetic, hair restoration, cardiothoracic, and maxillofacial surgery. Could all of these specialties be wrong about PRP? I really doubt it.

So, we ask the question: what does it take for something to no longer be classified as experimental? In my opinion, as a physician of 25 years, treatments should no longer be considered experimental if they meet the following basic criteria:

1) They have been used consistently in medicine for 10 years or longer by a reasonably high percentage of specialists in a particular field.

2) Quality studies published in the reputable medical journals demonstrate a clinically significant benefit.

3) Use of a particular treatment steadily grows because of positive results with a low likelihood of adverse events.

If you evaluate PRP with this criteria, then it’s a no-brainer…it is no longer an experimental treatment.

Insurance companies do serve a valuable role in our medical system. Without them, health care would be unaffordable for many Americans. However, the criteria they sometimes use to classify whether a particular treatment or test is covered or not is often very flawed and/or “behind the times.” Here’s a classic example: we could choose to give 10 steroid/cortisone injections into a patient’s knee in just one year, and almost all insurance companies would pay us for each injection. This could be very damaging to the joint, but it would be a “covered” procedure. In contrast, PRP injections, which have been shown to be superior to steroid injections for knee osteoarthritis in dozens of studies, would not be covered by insurance.

So, as a patient, you have to be discerning and partner with a physician who understands what treatment options are best for you. Basing these decisions on what insurance covers can be a short-sighted approach.

In conclusion, both physicians and insurance companies play vital roles in the care of the patient, but these roles are different. I say, “let doctors doctor and administrators administer.” For now, don’t count on a PRP injection to covered by insurance companies any time soon, but that should not deter you from choosing these valuable treatments. Want even more info? Check out one of our recent blogs on the topic:

Why Insurance Does Not Pay For Platelet-Rich Plasma Injections, But Why That Should Not Deter You — Impact Sports Medicine & Orthopedics (impactsportsnashville.com)

As always, let us know if we can be of assistance to you.

F. Clarke Holmes, M.D.

Three Common Financial Misconceptions in the Medical World

Understanding the complexity of various medical expenses can be overwhelming for a patient. We medical professionals are patients too! Even for us, sometimes the numbers just don’t make sense. At Impact Sports Medicine and Orthopedics, our desire is to educate patients regarding the value of these office visits and procedures and their potential out-of-pocket costs, so that they can make informed decisions regarding their health care from both a medical and economic perspective.

Here are three common misconceptions when it comes to medical expenses:

1. If my physician is not in-network with my insurance company, my medical expenses will be higher: until patients meet their deductibles, they typically will pay out-of-pocket for office visits, diagnostic tests and procedures. The amount a patient pays can also depend on a patient’s out-of-network provisions in their plan and/or the amount an out-of-network provider chooses to bill the patient. Often an out-of-network provider will ask the patient to pay cash, and this amount can be and often is less than the contracted amount an in-network provider has with your insurance. Example: you have Insurance X, a plan that has accepted very few in-network physicians. You have not met your deductible and you see an in-network orthopedic specialist for a consult. You have an office visit and x-rays. Insurance X allows $150 for the office visit and $50 for the x-rays. You now owe that in-network physician $200. Alternatively, you see a provider at our practice as we are in-network with most insurance plans, but not with Insurance X. We charge you $120 for the office visit and $30 for x-rays. Thus, your bill with us is $150, a $50 savings compared to the in-network provider.

2. If a procedure is not covered by insurance, it will cost me more in the long run: as an example, let’s use a procedure such as a platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injection. PRP has been used in orthopedics for 15 years. It has never been covered by insurance (although it should be in certain circumstances…that’s a whole different conversation). You have stubborn plantar fasciitis. You’ve done all the typical treatments, but your heel still really hurts. You consult with a foot surgeon who offers an open or endoscopic plantar fascia release surgery. Guess what, your insurance covers this procedure! However, you have a $5000 deductible, and you are nowhere near meeting this. This surgery will have charges from the surgery center, the anesthesiologist and the foot surgeon. Let’s say that your total cost for this surgery is $3000 with a 75% success rate, a 4-month recovery and some risk of additional complications. Compare this to one or two PRP injections, with each injection costing you $800. PRP, in our opinion, will have similar success rates and recovery times with fewer complications. $1600 for PRP versus $3000 for the surgery, even though the surgery is “covered by insurance.”

3. When it comes to an office visit or the same procedure done at different practices, insurance companies pay or allow the same amount for each physician/practice: did you know that all practices, hospitals and other medical businesses have contracted rates of payments with private insurers (non-Medicare, non-Medicaid)? If a physician is part of a bigger organization such as a hospital or a large private practice, then that group typically has greater negotiating power and can obtain higher reimbursement rates from the insurance companies. These rates have nothing to do with the quality of medical care, the training or experience level of the providers or the success rates of their interventions. So, let’s say you see a physician associated with a hospital system. You haven’t met the deductible, and you are billed for a Level 4 new patient visit. Your insurance allows $200 for that visit to that provider. Alternately, your household family member sees a physician at a smaller practice like ours, also is billed for a Level 4 new patient visit, yet the same insurance only allows for $150 for that visit, even though the same level of care was provided. So, you owe $50 more to that hospital-based practice than your family member owes to the smaller private practice. Thus, it’s important to realize that often cost really does vary based on who you are seeing, and your cost is not associated with the quality of the care.

   At Impact Sports Medicine, cost education and financial transparency are very important to the physician-patient relationship. We strive to provide the highest quality of care for a reasonable out-of-pocket cost to you.

   F. Clarke Holmes, M.D.