Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

maggiesfarmer

(297 posts)
Fri Mar 9, 2012, 08:55 PM Mar 2012

worker's comp can't get health care at non-urgent/non-ER in NC?

Last edited Sat Mar 10, 2012, 02:48 PM - Edit history (1)

here's what happened to my wife, Maggie, today. she works for a non-profit in North Carolina. guy hurt his ankle on the job, wanted to see a doctor. she suggests he see his regular physician, as urgent care or ER is very expensive to the NP. he goes to the same doctor he's seen for 5 years, tells him he has a worker's comp issue... and they refuse to see him!

dude calls Maggie: "my doc won't see me, says I should go to urgent care."

Maggie calls a few other docs nearby, foot/ankle specialists. same answer, "we don't take worker's comp cases, we recommend an urgent care facility." "but those places are expensive, don't you have an opening?" "no, we don't take comp cases -- it takes too long to get payment and requires too much processing." "can you recommend anyone who does?" "no, sorry <click>". !!?!??!

it quickly got to the point where the money they were trying to save was being lost by the time spent looking, and dude is hurting, so he goes to a nearby urgent care facility. The NP will get a big bill for a service that a family physician or foot & ankle doc could've done. could've done cheaper if the guy had just not mentioned workman's comp and billed his employer funded insurance. I know comp claims trigger the insurance company going through some kind of investigation but is this so expensive that docs are willing to turn away the work?

is it really less expensive for the local foot & ankle doc to turn away business than to go through whatever extra process is associated with comp claims? is this unique to North Carolina? what are the driving factors behind this? is there collusion to drive up health care costs at the provider level? do we just have too many doctors if they're this quick to turn away work?

for a long term solution, the NP is going to do a one time exhaustive search and find some GPs who will service their comp claims, but this was very surprising to us. interested in other's experience.

TIA

14 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
worker's comp can't get health care at non-urgent/non-ER in NC? (Original Post) maggiesfarmer Mar 2012 OP
If he got hurt on the job then there are two options kdmorris Mar 2012 #1
ok, i've read this a few times and think i understand all the legaleze, but I stil don't understand maggiesfarmer Mar 2012 #3
It's not more expensive kdmorris Mar 2012 #6
it's not picky. i appreciate the feedback and have edited my post. maggiesfarmer Mar 2012 #4
Garamendi had it right. silverweb Mar 2012 #2
yes he did dana_b Mar 2012 #5
So sorry about your back. silverweb Mar 2012 #8
Not sure if this helps explain anything but Workers Comp was created to protect employers NNN0LHI Mar 2012 #7
I worked for a physician Sgent Mar 2012 #9
all that makes sense, but it's almost unbelievable to me that in this economy maggiesfarmer Mar 2012 #10
Every Sgent Mar 2012 #12
curious, what part of the country are you in? maggiesfarmer Mar 2012 #13
i'm in practice mgmt/EMR IT and you are soooo right. Cooley Hurd Mar 2012 #11
Saving money - anon223 Oct 2012 #14

kdmorris

(5,649 posts)
1. If he got hurt on the job then there are two options
Fri Mar 9, 2012, 09:21 PM
Mar 2012

a) ER/Urgent Care until able to put in a claim (for those people who are in serious need of medical care before they put in the claim)

b) put in a claim and get a list of doctors who deal with Workers' Compensation.

Most doctors will not deal directly with a WC employee, since it's typically the employer that must make the claim for payment. From the NC WC law:

Section §97-25. Medical treatment and supplies.

Medical compensation shall be provided by the employer.

Upon the written request of the employee to the employer, the employer may agree to authorize and pay for a second opinion examination with a duly qualified physician licensed to practice in North Carolina, or licensed in another state if agreed to by the parties or ordered by the Commission. If, within 14 calendar days of the receipt of the written request, the request is denied or the parties, in good faith, are unable to agree upon a health care provider to perform a second opinion examination, the employee may request that the Industrial Commission order a second opinion examination. The expense thereof shall be borne by the employer upon the same terms and conditions as provided in this section for medical compensation.

Provided, however, if the employee so desires, an injured employee may select a health care provider of the employee's own choosing to attend, prescribe, and assume the care and charge of the employee's case subject to the approval of the Industrial Commission. In addition, in case of a controversy arising between the employer and the employee, the Industrial Commission may order necessary treatment. In order for the Commission to grant an employee's request to change treatment or health care provider, the employee must show by a preponderance of the evidence that the change is reasonably necessary to effect a cure, provide relief, or lessen the period of disability. When deciding whether to grant an employee's request to change treatment or health care provider, the Commission may disregard or give less weight to the opinion of a health care provider from whom the employee sought evaluation, diagnosis, or treatment before the employee first requested authorization in writing from the employer, insurer, or Commission.

The refusal of the employee to accept any medical compensation when ordered by the Industrial Commission shall bar the employee from further compensation until such refusal ceases, and no compensation shall at any time be paid for the period of suspension unless in the opinion of the Industrial Commission the circumstances justified the refusal. Any order issued by the Commission suspending compensation pursuant to G.S. 97‑18.1 shall specify what action the employee should take to end the suspension and reinstate the compensation.

If in an emergency on account of the employer's failure to provide medical compensation, a physician other than provided by the employer is called to treat the injured employee, the reasonable cost of such service shall be paid by the employer if so ordered by the Industrial Commission. (1929, c. 120, s. 25; 1931, c. 274, s. 4; 1933, c. 506; 1955, c. 1026, s. 2; 1973, c. 520, s. 1; 1991, c. 703, s. 3; 1997-308, s. 1; 1999-150, s. 1; 2005; 2011.)


P.S. I know it's really picky, but it's generally called Worker's Compensation these days.

maggiesfarmer

(297 posts)
3. ok, i've read this a few times and think i understand all the legaleze, but I stil don't understand
Sat Mar 10, 2012, 02:46 PM
Mar 2012

how processing a WORKER'S comp claim is so expensive to warrant turning away work by GPs and non-urgent specialists.

thanks for citing the code's, though.

kdmorris

(5,649 posts)
6. It's not more expensive
Sat Mar 10, 2012, 03:12 PM
Mar 2012

You have the right of it. It's crazy how they've turned something that was a PROTECTION for workers into a bureaucratic nightmare.

Sorry... I think I failed to actually answer your question in my quest to help you.

silverweb

(16,402 posts)
2. Garamendi had it right.
Fri Mar 9, 2012, 09:35 PM
Mar 2012

[font color="navy" face="Verdana"]Former California Insurance Commissioner, Lt. Governor, and now Congressman John Garamendi advocated for years that abolition of the entire workers' comp system could, almost all by itself, pay for universal health care in California.

More money goes to lawyers than doctors in workers' comp. As a system, it's thoroughly inefficient, wasteful of resources, and unnecessarily expensive.

With universal health care, an injured worker would first and foremost get necessary treatment. Any legal issues would be settled later.

dana_b

(11,546 posts)
5. yes he did
Sat Mar 10, 2012, 03:09 PM
Mar 2012

and he still holds that position (he's my rep). I know that on a personal note, my back issues would more than likely be taken care of if we had universal healthcare but as a result of almost 8 years of fighting with workman's comp insurance companies, I am still waiting for the treatment that I need (and that has been ordered by the court). Workman's comp is a horribly expensive, trying and outdated system.

silverweb

(16,402 posts)
8. So sorry about your back.
Sun Mar 11, 2012, 04:12 AM
Mar 2012

[font color="navy" face="Verdana"]He's not my rep, but I got to meet him and was marginally involved in his first congressional campaign. He's a good man and I hope he's reelected.

I also hope you get the treatment you need and a decent settlement!

NNN0LHI

(67,190 posts)
7. Not sure if this helps explain anything but Workers Comp was created to protect employers
Sat Mar 10, 2012, 03:25 PM
Mar 2012

It was not created to protect workers as a lot of people believe.

WC laws were enacted to replace the employees right to sue civilly when injured on the job. Employers didn't want a jury of our peers deciding what would be a fair settlement. They wanted politically connected, pro-business, appointed flunkies making these decisions.

Don

Sgent

(5,857 posts)
9. I worked for a physician
Sun Mar 11, 2012, 04:49 AM
Mar 2012

that would see W/C patients (family practice).

Generally -- for acute injuries, simple wound closures, sprains, etc. payment was no big deal -- we submitted the claim just like any other and it was paid.

However, with more complex problems it could be a real headache. If you needed more than one visit, reams of paperwork had to be collected and submitted, plans of care, prior authorizations for almost everything, etc. This took a lot of unpaid staff and physician time, and really made us think twice.

maggiesfarmer

(297 posts)
10. all that makes sense, but it's almost unbelievable to me that in this economy
Mon Mar 12, 2012, 07:01 AM
Mar 2012

physicians have so much work that it's more advantageous to turn away comp claims than to pay office workers to process the additional paperwork.

Sgent

(5,857 posts)
12. Every
Mon Mar 12, 2012, 03:40 PM
Mar 2012

primary care physician I know is turning away patients, so they have their choice of who / what plans to deal with.

Medicare is actually very easy to deal with -- they just pay less. Most primary care docs will not accept new Medicare patients these days (although they will continue to see existing patients who age onto Medicare).

maggiesfarmer

(297 posts)
13. curious, what part of the country are you in?
Tue Mar 13, 2012, 10:21 AM
Mar 2012

I'm trying to find out if docs have too much work nationwide? it seems that if we're short on doctors now, things will only get worse in 2014

anon223

(15 posts)
14. Saving money -
Tue Oct 30, 2012, 05:17 PM
Oct 2012

not flaming anyone, but the person who is hurt is trying to save someone else $ - and it did not work out. A pretty firm rule in life is that you can have it good/cheap/quick - pick two.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»worker's comp can't get h...