SINGAPORE – Media OutReach – 31 March
2021 – Integrated Shield Plans (IPs) impact most Singaporeans and IP
insurers have been implementing various measures to manage IP costs
appropriately and without compromising needed medical care for policyholders.
The main objective of the recommendations put forth by the Health Insurance
Task Force (HITF) in 2016[1]
was to bring down the rate of claims cost inflation so that premium increases
can be moderated and kept sustainable. All recommendations by the Task Force
have since been implemented.[2]
It is
the responsibility of all parties involved to be proactive and work
collaboratively to ensure the continued accessibility of quality healthcare in
Singapore.
Greater
transparency required from all parties
We
agree that greater transparency will provide more clarity on this matter.
On this
end, we recently concluded an update of the LIA Singapore guidelines on panel management.
This includes guidance that IP insurers should explain the criteria for
selection of panel doctors and is publicly available on the LIA Singapore
website[3].
Equally,
we urge SMA to respond to our repeated calls for greater transparency too. LIA
Singapore has requested for clinical quality measures and guidelines to prevent
over-treatment on numerous occasions. We ask that SMA respond promptly and
positively on this.
Clinical
quality measures will enable insurers to make better, evidence-based decisions
on admitting doctors into panels. Policyholders will ultimately benefit because
they will receive better care.
Expanding
panels to include all private specialists may result in the need for further
premium increases
IP
panels have been implemented for several years now and are not completely new
to the IP market. Panels have expanded over time, and LIA Singapore’s guidance
to IP insurers is that panels should be sufficient to offer a wide range of
medical services to policyholders. IP insurers have an interest in ensuring
that their panels are comprehensive as this increases panel usage, which helps
insurers better manage costs.
SMA is
strongly advocating for panels to be expanded to include all private
specialists in Singapore, and for all panel doctors to be compensated up to the
upper bounds of the MOH fee benchmark range. This needs to be carefully
considered as tradeoffs are involved.
The average
ratio of upper bound to lower bound for surgeon fee benchmarks is 1.8[4]. As
such, proceeding per SMA’s suggestion without calibration may lead to cost
increases and further premium increases for policyholders.
Striking
this balance is critical, and we invite SMA for a discussion on how this can be
done in a way that will not disproportionately burden policyholders with higher
premiums.
Misleading
analysis should be avoided
It is
important that organisations put out objective analyses which avoid biased
conclusions.
In this
regard, we find SMA’s analysis of insurers’ costs and claims costs to be
misleading. Claim increases are the main driver of premium increases. LIA
Singapore will fully address this in due course, along with more detailed
comments on the rest of SMA’s position statement.
Importance of collaboration to achieve our shared goal of affordable,
quality healthcare for Singaporeans
Our
collective priority must be to focus on finding the best ways to achieve a
common goal for the benefit of Singaporeans.
LIA
Singapore has always pursued an open, discussive and constructive dialogue to
receive feedback and resolve potential issues. Updating of the abovementioned
LIA guidelines on panel doctor and, previously, the standard LIA
Pre-Authorisation Form[5]
based on SMA’s inputs were also actioned on swiftly.
Accordingly,
we look forward to greater collaboration amongst all parties with the formation
of a trilateral committee, comprising LIA Singapore, SMA and the Academy of
Medicine, Singapore already set up by the Ministry of Health (MOH) to discuss
and resolve IP-related issues, and to refine the implementation of HITF
recommendations together in a constructive manner.
Appendix 1: Summary of HITF recommendations
Recommendations
|
Impact on Stakeholders
|
Introducing Medical
–
–
–
|
Consumers (or
·
Healthcare
·
·
Payers (IP
·
·
|
Clarification on
–
–
–
|
Consumers (or
·
·
Healthcare
·
Payers (IP
·
·
|
Enhancing Insurance
·
–
–
–
|
Consumers (or
·
·
Healthcare
·
Payers (IP
·
·
|
Enhancing Insurance
·
–
–
|
Consumers (or
·
·
Healthcare
·
·
Payers (IP
·
·
|
Enhancing Insurance
·
–
–
|
Consumers (or
·
·
Healthcare
·
·
Payers (IP
·
|
Educating Consumers
–
–
|
Consumers (or
·
|
Appendix 2: Health Insurance Task Force
composition
Name
|
Designation
|
Ms
(Chairman)
|
Principal,
|
Dr
|
President,
|
Mr
|
Deputy
|
Mr
|
President,
|
Mr
|
Executive
|
Dr
|
President,
|
Dr
|
Council
|
Mr
|
Director
|
Ms
|
Deputy
|
Ms
|
Director
|
Ms
|
Director
|
Industry
experts:
Name
|
Designation
|
Dr
|
Head
|
Mr
|
Chief
|
Appendix 3: HITF
Terms of reference
To
recommend measures to bring about moderation in the escalation of health
insurance premiums in Singapore, including, but not limited to:
* Measures
that increase the transparency of health services charging;
* Measures
conducive to the provision of appropriate care at appropriate cost by
healthcare professionals; and
* Educational
measures to help consumers make prudent choices of health services, and to
raise the awareness of healthcare providers of measures conducive to the
provision of appropriate care at appropriate cost.
[2] Refer to
Appendices for a summary of the HITF
recommendations and members of the Task Force, Task Force composition, and HITF
Terms of Reference. Information extracted from the Report
Source link