Prior Authorization: Continual Bad Rap – Magnified

Prior Authorization: Continual Bad Rap – Magnified

During the last several months, the federal government has been siding with healthcare providers in an all-out assault on the prior authorization process, which requires providers to get approval from insurers before giving certain treatments to patients.

The Kaiser Family Foundation recently noted that few things about the American healthcare system infuriate patients and doctors more than prior authorization.

But why? The prior authorization process was originally designed to prevent doctors from ordering expensive tests or procedures that are not indicated or needed, with the aim of delivering cost-effective care; the process’s architects focused on the costliest types of care only, such as cancer treatment. Considering the rampant overutilization and expense in the healthcare sector, that sounds pretty good.

However, these days, opponents claim that this process is doing exactly the opposite, providing no guardrails against useless, expensive treatment, but instead preventing patients from getting the vital care they need by commonly requiring prior authorization even for many commonplace medical encounters.

For example, a new survey touted by the American Medical Association (AMA) last week found that one in three physicians blamed prior authorization for a patient’s serious adverse event, including hospitalization, permanent impairment, or death, while 86 percent of physicians surveyed alleged that prior authorization rules led to greater use of healthcare resources overall.

Relatedly, last December I appeared on a Monitor Mondays broadcast to highlight a proposed rule from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) that would purportedly improve and streamline prior authorization processes. And at the time, health plans, providers, and their respective trade associations were expressing great support for the proposal.

Oh, how quickly things change. Not only are providers and patients now suggesting that the proposal doesn’t go far enough, putting its future on shaky ground, but since gaining the support of members of Congress and even the U.S. Surgeon General – who just 10 days ago publicly stated that eliminating prior authorization would go a long way toward addressing the nationwide crisis of clinician burnout – these groups have gained real momentum. As such, their cries for reining in a process they feel harms and frustrates patients have amplified.

One of the more remarkable and persuasive trends that’s been seen lately is the way prior authorization opponents have drawn the support of insurers, when such entities are typically the principal champions of prior authorization use. But it can be tough to support it as a cost-saving mechanism when you consider this simple scenario:

As physicians increasingly feel that the prior authorization system is convoluted and time-consuming, as well as a challenge to their medical expertise, they wash their hands of the process entirely and just send patients to the emergency room, which they consider a more efficient approach to getting patients needed drugs and/or services.

The result, of course, is that emergency care costs both insurers and patients much more money. And again, this runs in direct contrast to the intended effect of using prior authorization in the first place.

While there is no miracle cure for the prior authorization issue seemingly running rampant in healthcare, what can be done here to at least mitigate some of the perceived challenges with the process?

Several health plans are taking matters into their own hands, revising their policies to cut down the number of prior authorizations by eliminating the need for patients to obtain permission for certain diagnostic procedures. Other plans have adopted artificial intelligence and other tech functionalities to accelerate prior authorization decision-making.

Meanwhile, according to a 2022 CAQH report, 35 percent of providers and payers still perform prior authorization manually, by phone, mail, fax, or email, and at a cost of about $14.50 per manual request. With 43 million manual requests reported, that’s more than $623 million.

By electronically automating these requests, the cost per request would radically decline to $3.50, saving hundreds of millions of dollars, along with countless hours of administrative burden and aggravation.

Finally, by the end of last year, more than 40 states had either considered or taken action to reform the prior authorization process, indicating that those patient and provider cries for help are being heard by lawmakers across the country. It’ll be interesting to see if that trend continues this year, during state legislative sessions.

But regardless, until all stakeholders involved come together and find consensus on a tangible, real-world fix to this issue, there will always be someone waiting impatiently for relief.

So, while the pile-on to prior authorization’s already bad rap persists, perhaps we should try giving the system a little hands-on TLC, an approach that may aid in prior authorization reaching its full potential, while avoiding many of the pitfalls.

In the meantime, I like the idea of considering the nature of prior authorization on a broader scale, which a healthcare blogger I read recently summed up quite aptly, noting that it is really a microcosm for the healthcare industry as a whole – well-intended, unnecessarily complex, indisputably damaged, but ultimately, fixable.

Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn

Adam Brenman

Adam Brenman is a Sr. Gov’t Affairs Liaison at Zelis Healthcare. He previously served as Manager of Public Policy at WellCare Health Plans, where he led an analyst team in review, analysis, and development of advocacy materials related to state and federal legislation/regulatory guidance. He holds a master’s degree in Public Policy & Administration from Northwestern University and has also worked as a government affairs rep/lobbyist for a national healthcare provider association.

Related Stories

Abe Sutton and MA Reform

Abe Sutton and MA Reform

From think tanks to federal agencies, health policy in the U.S. is often shaped by voices we don’t always see in the headlines. Abe Sutton,

Read More

Leave a Reply

Please log in to your account to comment on this article.

Featured Webcasts

2026 IPPS Masterclass 3: Master MS-DRG Shifts and NTAPs

2026 IPPS Masterclass Day 3: MS-DRG Shifts and NTAPs

This third session in our 2026 IPPS Masterclass will feature a review of FY26 changes to the MS-DRG methodology and new technology add-on payments (NTAPs), presented by nationally recognized ICD-10 coding expert Christine Geiger, MA, RHIA, CCS, CRC, with bonus insights and analysis from Dr. James Kennedy.

August 14, 2025
2026 IPPS Masterclass Day 2: Master ICD-10-PCS Changes

2026 IPPS Masterclass Day 2: Master ICD-10-PCS Changes

This second session in our 2026 IPPS Masterclass will feature a review the FY26 changes to ICD-10-PCS codes. This information will be presented by nationally recognized ICD-10 coding expert Christine Geiger, MA, RHIA, CCS, CRC, with bonus insights and analysis from Dr. James Kennedy.

August 13, 2025
2026 IPPS Masterclass 1: Master ICD-10-CM Changes

2026 IPPS Masterclass Day 1: Master ICD-10-CM Changes

This first session in our 2026 IPPS Masterclass will feature an in-depth explanation of FY26 changes to ICD-10-CM codes and guidelines, CCs/MCCs, and revisions to the MCE, presented by presented by nationally recognized ICD-10 coding expert Christine Geiger, MA, RHIA, CCS, CRC, with bonus insights and analysis from Dr. James Kennedy.

August 12, 2025

Trending News

Featured Webcasts

The Two-Midnight Rule: New Challenges, Proven Strategies

The Two-Midnight Rule: New Challenges, Proven Strategies

RACmonitor is proud to welcome back Dr. Ronald Hirsch, one of his most requested webcasts. In this highly anticipated session, Dr. Hirsch will break down the complex Two Midnight Rule Medicare regulations, translating them into clear, actionable guidance. He’ll walk you through the basics of the rule, offer expert interpretation, and apply the rule to real-world clinical scenarios—so you leave with greater clarity, confidence, and the tools to ensure compliance.

June 19, 2025
Open Door Forum Webcast Series

Open Door Forum Webcast Series

Bring your questions and join the conversation during this open forum series, live every Wednesday at 10 a.m. EST from June 11–July 30. Hosted by Chuck Buck, these fast-paced 30-minute sessions connect you directly with top healthcare experts tackling today’s most urgent compliance and policy issues.

June 11, 2025
Open Door Forum: The Changing Face of Addiction: Coding, Compliance & Care

Open Door Forum: The Changing Face of Addiction: Coding, Compliance & Care

Substance abuse is everywhere. It’s a complicated diagnosis with wide-ranging implications well beyond acute care. The face of addiction continues to change so it’s important to remember not just the addict but the spectrum of extended victims and the other social determinants and legal ramifications. Join John K. Hall, MD, JD, MBA, FCLM, FRCPC, for a critical Q&A on navigating substance abuse in 2025.  Register today and be a part of the conversation!

July 16, 2025

Trending News

Happy National Doctor’s Day! Learn how to get a complimentary webcast on ‘Decoding Social Admissions’ as a token of our heartfelt appreciation! Click here to learn more →

CYBER WEEK IS HERE! Don’t miss your chance to get 20% off now until Dec. 2 with code CYBER24