Search the Community

Did a search and is surprise nobody post this before https://www.todayonline.com/explainer-why-singapore-medical-association-and-private-insurers-locked-battle-over-integrated-shield-plans Explainer: Why the Singapore Medical Association and private insurers are locked in battle over Integrated Shield Plans The Singapore Medical Association (SMA) and Life Insurance Association Singapore (LIA) are at odds over the mechanics of Integrated Shield Plans SMA issued a position statement decrying that the insurers had formed “highly exclusive” medical panels and disrespected fee benchmarks SMA also complained that insurance premiums had increasingly been used for non-healthcare cost items LIA’s comeback alluded to “over-treatment” by medical providers It also criticised SMA for using misleading analysis SINGAPORE — An ongoing tussle between the medical fraternity and insurance companies is intensifying over the payouts, premiums and doctor panels of Integrated Shield Plans (IPs). Such insurance plans are made of two parts: A MediShield Life component managed by the Central Provident Fund Board, and the other is provided by private insurers. About seven in 10 residents here had bought these plans from private insurers to get added coverage on top of MediShield Life, the Government’s basic health insurance plan for all citizens and permanent residents. Last Thursday (March 25), the Singapore Medical Association (SMA) launched an offensive and spelt out in a position statement how IP insurers had been curtailing doctor choice by: This came after weeks of exchanges among insurance policyholders, doctors and the Life Insurance Association Singapore (LIA) on the topic in The Straits Times’ Forum page. SMA also said that insurance premiums collected were “excessively” spent on non-healthcare cost items, pointing out that the growth in insurers’ management expenses (56.6 per cent) and commission for insurance agents (50.4 per cent) had far outstripped that of the medical claims (35.9 per cent). “Instead of repeatedly lamenting that healthcare providers and policyholders are to blame for the losses incurred by some IP insurers through overconsumption, overservicing and overcharging, IP insurers should take the necessary steps to explore cutting their own management and commission costs to enhance the sustainability of the IP sector,” it said. LIA, representing insurers, issued a response to SMA on Monday, saying there were cases of “over-treatment” by medical providers and calling out SMA for using misleading analysis on insurers’ costs and claim costs. On its part, SMA has chosen to take matters into its own hands by introducing an initiative to rank insurers on an annual basis to show the public how appropriate each of the insurers’ fee scales are, and how difficult it is for policyholders to use non-panel doctors. SMA has also set up a complaints committee for patients and doctors to flag issues related to IPs and health insurance, including when patients are being denied insurance coverage or when doctors are not adequately reimbursed for their services.