I’ve been limping badly now for over a month. I’ve started physical therapy, which, along with the daily exercises my therapist has given me, has helped somewhat. But I would like to know more about what’s going on with my left leg. So I met with my doctor earlier this week to see if he could order an MRI. His nurse called me the next day to say that my insurer had said yes but wanted me to use a local provider that is, presumably, in my insurer’s network. The alternative was the provider that my doctor usually refers people to.
So I called my insurer and found out that when I use an in-network provider, the insurer will pay 90% of the approved part of the charge, whereas if I use an out-of-network provider, the insurer will pay only 75% of the approved part of the charge.
Start with the assumption that the in-network provider’s charge is the same as the out-of-network provider’s charge. (I know that assumption is almost certain to be wrong; I’ll relax it later in this post.) Also assume that the insurer approves the same part of the charge, whether or not the provider is in-network or out-of-network.(Again, I bet this assumption is wrong.)
Let’s say the charge is about $1,400 and that the approved part is $1,400. Then I would pay $350 out of network or $140 in network. So I would save $210 by going in network.
Now relax the assumption. Say the insurer approves $1,000 for out-of-network and the same $1,000 for in-network, but has negotiated an in-network price with the provider of $1,000, whereas the out-of-network charges $1,400. Then I would pay $250 + $400 = $650 for out of network, but only $100 for in-network.
This might be rational pricing. The insurer has found a provider that is more efficient and willing to share some of the efficiency gains with the insurer. So it tilts me in that direction. It’s also possible that I’ll get in to get the MRI later if I use the in-network rather than the out-of-network. Which means that I’m paying more for the convenience of quicker out-of-network service. Also rational pricing.
Stay tuned.
Postscript: I told my doctor about the North Dakota MRI provider that charges between $400 and $690 for an MRI and targets Canadians who would be paying out of pocket and don’t want to wait in Canada’s queues. He suggested that the prices are so low because they aren’t out to maximize profits. I responded that I thought the reason is that they are trying to maximize profits, but have to compete for customers who are paying out of their own pockets, unsubsidized by insurance.
READER COMMENTS
Alan Goldhammer
Aug 25 2021 at 6:25pm
It’s even worse than what you write. See this NY Times article about how hospitals are not posting any of their prices even though they are supposed to. The base case is an MRI. There are some good examples of how you get shafted by not be able to get this information. You and I also agree that more pricing transparency is required. Pretty amazing twice in one day!!!
If they did attribute your leg issue to a disc problem in you lower back, I would advise getting a copy of Stuart McGill’s fine book, ‘Back Mechanic’ McGill is a fellow Canadian and retired from Waterloo University where he directed the spine biomechanics laboratory. I do his Big Three exercises every day to help strengthen my core and stabilize a weak disc. There are lots of good YouTube videos featuring McGill and others showing the exercises.
David Henderson
Aug 25 2021 at 11:37pm
You wrote:
I’m actually arguing that it could be good. That’s why I said “stay tuned.”
You wrote:
Thank you so much, Alan.
robc
Aug 25 2021 at 8:09pm
Its probably not worth the flight for an MRI, but have you checked the price at surgery center of Oklahoma?
David Henderson
Aug 25 2021 at 11:37pm
I haven’t. But you’re right that going there is a bad idea, given that I’m coming from Monterey and not, say, Norman.
robc
Aug 26 2021 at 10:24am
For more expensive surgeries, they have people coming in from all over the country (and Canada). Self-insured companies are paying for their employees to take a flight and a hotel stay and get the surgery there instead of doing it thru insurance.
It has to be a pretty expensive surgery to make this work, not an MRI obviously.
Christophe Biocca
Aug 26 2021 at 8:40am
As best as I can tell they don’t offer the service themselves, but their free market medical association has an online search capability.
Unfortunately their proximity search isn’t very good, and filtering by state makes it clear there’s zero participants in California, but you can see the price range (depending on the kind of MRI) is between $400 and $1000.
Thomas Lee Hutcheson
Aug 26 2021 at 8:05am
I wonder if insurers have considered MRI providers in Mexico and if not, why not.
Vivian Darkbloom
Aug 26 2021 at 9:25am
Not that it matters much to your conclusion, but wouldn’t you pay $650 for the out-of-network MRI rather than $750? ($1,400-$1000)+($1,000 -(.75 x $1,000)) = $650.
David Henderson
Aug 26 2021 at 10:50am
Right you are. Thanks. Correction made.
Michael Sandifer
Aug 26 2021 at 2:29pm
Your new book’s called The Money Illusion? I went on Amazon to pre-order, and found it was already released in hardcover and soldout. I hope there’s a Kindle copy soon, because I greatly prefer e-reading.
David Henderson
Aug 26 2021 at 2:43pm
No. I think you might be thinking of my co-blogger Scott Sumner.
My new book, co-authored with Steven Globerman, is titled The Essential UCLA School of Economics.
James Goss
Aug 31 2021 at 8:19am
I may be too late with this suggestion, but you should also call the providers directly and ask for the cash price. It may be lower than the cost of going through your insurance at all. If you have a high deductible I would almost guarantee that being a cash patient will be your lowest cost option. The last MRI I paid for was quoted as $550 through insurance (our cost, since deductible hadn’t been reached) or $250 as a cash patient. So much for the insurer “negotiating” a discount.
Comments are closed.