Today I hear about an optometrist in Utah who bilked Medicaid for patients he never even saw!

Before insurance companies (especially government ones) start bearing down on all of us with burdensome regulations because of a few bad actors, let’s take a step back an look at the problem from a different angle.

This is why insurances shouldn’t pay for physician office visits, but if they want to, then leave the doctor out of it and just reimburse the patient. My car insurance doesn’t pay for oil changes or gasoline. If my car insurance was crazy enough to offer an oil change benefit, then that would be great, but if I’m Convenience Lube, then no way would I take deferred payment from some car insurance company. I would demand the car owner pay at the time of service, and their crazy insurance company can reimburse the car owner later. If my car is in a major accident, then I would less likely have cash on hand for an expensive repair, so this is when the insurance companies would step in. Besides, autobody shops are much more accustomed to dealing with insurance compared to oil change shops or gas stations.

This is how it should be in healthcare. Only certain providers would really have a need to regularly bill insurances. Mostly doctors doing surgeries, hospitals, or other high cost care environments.

Number one, this helps lower the cost of medical care because people find out how much it actually costs since doctors don’t have a big menu/price sign over the reception desk. Second, doctors don’t have to spend tons of money and time filing claims. Third, the incidence of doctors perpetrating insurance fraud would go down because doctors would have less opportunity anyway. Fourth, if something isn’t covered by insurance, who presently gets to eat it? Usually the doctor. Patients paying their own office visits would force the patient to be more accountable for whether they really want/need a particular service, regardless if they expect their insurance to reimburse or not.

The doctor shouldn’t be beholden to any insurance company. He should deliver care according to his training/experience. She shouldn’t have to try to remember that Insurance A will pay for a visual field once a year, but Insurance B will allow it twice a year, etc. He shouldn’t think about if he has the patient do an extended medical history, he can upgrade his exam from level 3 to level 4 to bilk the insurance company for all they’re worth because hey, the patient is only paying a copay, right?

I think big ticket items like billing for surgeries or expensive procedures should still be billed by providers/hospitals since this is what insurance is for: paying for catastrophic, unexpected events. But all the little stuff, like inpatient food service and routine exams and regular office visits should be paid up front by patients. It would lower healthcare costs because providers could lower prices since their labor and accounts receivable would decrease. It would decrease over-utilization since patients have a financial stake in the process. It would decrease fraud since there would be less opportunity to create fraud by the majority of doctors/patient encounters.

I get photophobic patients sometimes, so this haiku is for them. If you liked this one, read more Optoblog poetry.

The procedure code is inconsistent with the provider type/specialty (taxonomy).

So I called Utah Medicaid, and confirmed that 92025 is the code for corneal topography, and they confirmed that optometrists are not allowed to be paid for corneal topography because only physicians and hospitals are allowed to bill this procedure code. I pressed that optometrists manage conditions like keratoconus with corneal topography and that their policy definitely needs to be changed. The UT medicaid worker said she would bring it up at their meeting, but that meeting isn’t until next week, and she had several other issues that weren’t address at the last meeting.

So, I think she was telling me that she couldn’t guarantee that anything regarding my issue would be addressed in the near future. Even if they do discuss it sometime this month, they might not change their mind.

THIS IS COMPLETELY RIDICULOUS!!!. Hospitals? Hospitals can bill for corneal topography? How often do they do that? Can we name even one hospital that even owns a corneal topographer? The only physicians who use corneal topographers are ophthalmologists, but if I were a pediatrician they would allow me to bill for it?

Attention Utah Medicaid Taxonomy-Procedure-Provider-Type Committee: I hereby declare that you should immediately allow optometrists, provider type 31, to bill and be reimbursed for computerized cornea topography, CPT code 92025. Blue Cross allows it. I am trained to perform and analyze this test in optometry school. I need it to manage conditions like keratoconus, irregular astigmatism, pterygium, pellucid marginal degeneration, and transplanted cornea. All of these conditions I see in my practice.

Until now, I am willing to grant that the taxonomy/provider-type thing is an oversight- a snafu with the computer database. Now that this error has come to light, the only reason I can think that Utah Medicaid would continue in this erroneous policy is that the committee members making that decision are a bunch of anti-optometrist bigots. I don’t want to think that, so please reverse your policy as quickly as possible and allow optometrists to bill corneal topography.

When people ask me what’s the difference between an ophthalmologist and an optometrist, I always like to say, “Optometrists do everything an ophthalmologist does except surgeries.”  (By the way, I don’t consider foreign body removal a surgery. Chalazion removal- yes, definitely a surgery.)  Even one of the ophthalmologists in the feature story seems to agree with that statement:

“We draw the philosophical line in the sand with surgery,” says Dr. David Parke, chief executive officer of the American Academy of Ophthalmology.

Of course, proponents of the bill think that allowing ODs to perform laser surgeries is good for people because, as Governor Beshear explains:

“I signed Senate Bill 110 to give Kentuckians greater access to necessary eye care.”

Now, I would probably refute that it gives people, particularly rural people, greater access to eye care. For a doctor to buy all the necessary equipment to perform a YAG capsulotomy, he would need to invest in a pretty expensive piece of equipment. To keep up payments, he would have to do a lot of procedures. How many YAGs does a rural optometrist usually see a month? Probably not a lot. How far away is the surgeon who did the patient’s cataract surgery in the first place? Probably not that far.

subtenon injection

subtenon injection materials

Anyway, I kind of like my definition of optometrist. What do you all think?

• 7-1-2011 Doctors will no longer get trials for O2Optix
• 1-1-2011 Product availability not guaranteed
• 7-1-2012 O2Optix lens discontinued.

Ciba has been pushing strongly the one month replacement modality which flies in the face of the two week replacement schedule philosophy of their competitor, Vistakon. Ciba’s recommended alternative for those who have been in O2Optix lenses is to have their doctor refit them in Air Optix Aqua.

Walmart will sell out their existing stock of ClearCare, but won’t be reordering more. Here’s from the memo dated 1-24-2011:

• Jan 1, 2001 Ciba Vision has incorporated a substantial cost increase to their Clear Care items throughout the industry.
• We take any and all cost increases very seriously especially if the supplier is unable to justify the significant increase completely.
• In the interest of our customers, we will not carry Clear Care until this matter is resolved.

They go on to suggest that the V.C. associates can ask the Doctor Partners to recommend a suitable alternative product.

Isn’t this what happened to Rubbermaid?

It’s a one month lens, which is convenient for most people to remember when to toss their now old lenses which will soon become cesspools ripe for eye infections. The reason is because they build up deposits, like this:

Replace your contacts on schedule!!!

Lots of lenses are only two week and toss lenses, but Biofinity is resistant to deposits enough to allow it to be a one month lens. Official and approved.

Biofinity also got an FDA indication for extended wear. In other words, if your doctor thinks your eyes can handle it, Biofinity can be worn one week straight, take it out, clean it, soak it overnight, and then repeat.

Now, I’ve tried this, and while it was totally doable, for me it’s not as comfortable for extended wear compared to Ciba’s Night & Day (by the way, I refuse to call it Air Optix Night & Day Aqua because that is just waaaaaaaay too long a name for a contact lens.) But guess what. That’s just me. Maybe for you it could be fine. However, almost every patient I’ve tried this with comes back a week or two later and says they would rather be Rx’d Night & Day if extended wear was their approved goal.

If you’re just interested in daily wear (taking out every night) or if price is the main consideration, then Biofinity wins over Night & Day because it’s only around $50 per box of 6 lenses rather than Night and Day at ~$70 per box of six. Another consideration is that you can now get Air Optix Aqua (regular, NOT Night & Day) for ~$47 per box. My only beef with that is that it’s basically the same lens as O2Optix which was released as a two week lens, so I’m not sure whether to believe that Ciba wants you to wear a 4 week lens for two weeks or a two week lens for four weeks.

Comfort-wise, it seems to me that the percentage of patients that like the comfort of the Biofinity is about the same percentage of people that like the feel of O2Optix. Now, the only thing is, both those percentages are less compared to Acuvue Oasys comfort. But consider that a year supply of Acuvue Oasys (a 2 week lens) is about ~$272 while Biofinity is around $200.

Biofinity has a great toric lens in case you have low to moderate amounts of astigmatism (0.75-2.50) in one or both eyes. For mild amounts of astigmatism (0.25-0.50 and maybe 0.75), its aspheric optics help mask it for clearer vision compared to contacts without aspheric optics.

Anyway, my advice is to just try it out. If you like it, buy it. If not, try something else. That’s how I roll. I alternate between wearing Biofinity, Acuvue Oasys, and Night & Day. Mostly Night & Day. But hey, I’ve been wearing contact lenses so long that you could poke me in the eye, and I’d barely feel it. But seriously, I think I have significant corneal hypoesthesia which allows me to tolerate pretty much any lens that gets pushed out into the contact lens market.

Another consideration for you is the compatibility of lens material to your desired contact lens solution system. Some lenses can only tolerate the most expensive solutions. The Biofinity material is pretty much compatible with even the most cheapest of house brand multi-purpose solutions. On average. Your eyes may vary.

I think Biofinity is a quality lens, but take it home along with your Oasys and Night & Day or O2Optix and see which one works best at which price for you.

There, does that answer your question?

Fly open. Zipper Broken.
Eyes elevated. Me Mortified.
Seventeen bucks at Division 1 saves the day.

True story, BTW.