It took literal murder for BCBS to retract 'heinous' new policy
Key Takeaways
Industry Buzz
"We need to come together under specialty societies, AMA, ACP, and continue public pressure to reshape the US healthcare system before it burns down." — doctor and reddit user @jafferd813
"This is great news but it's also depressing that it took THIS MUCH to get a bad policy reversed. Why does it take literal murder for a corporation to change course? What are we going to have to do in the future to affect change?" — anesthesiologist and reddit user @aglaeasfather
Anthem Blue Cross Blue Shield has decided not to proceed with a controversial policy change that would have capped reimbursements for anesthesia during surgeries and medical procedures, regardless of the patient’s needs or surgical complications. This reversal comes after widespread criticism from medical organizations, state officials, and the public.[]
The now-scrapped policy would have introduced time limits on anesthesia coverage for plans in Connecticut, New York, and Missouri, starting February 1, 2025. If surgeries extended beyond the predetermined limits, reimbursement for anesthesia services would have been denied.[]
The murder of UnitedHealthcare CEO and the online conversations it sparked about the shortcomings of the US healthcare system may have been a primary trigger in Anthem BCBS's decision to not proceed with the policy change, according to NBC News.[]
Related: UnitedHealthcare CEO was murdered today: A chilling targeted attack?
Outrage from the medical community
In a November 2024 press release, issued soon after Anthem BCBS's original announcement, the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) expressed strong opposition for the change, describing the time caps as “arbitrary” and inconsistent with industry standards.[] ASA President Dr. Donald E. Arnold had called the plan "a cynical money grab," highlighting the potential risks to patients and the undue financial strain on providers.
For physicians, the policy would exploit the commitment that anesthesiologists make to the safety of their patients, putting them in the difficult position of having to make decisions about how much care to provide, knowing they may not be reimbursed for the full duration. For patients, it would threaten the trust they have with their insurer.
Anthem BCBS's response
Fortunately for all of us, Anthem BCBS announced it will not be moving forward with the proposed change. They attributed the reversal to widespread "misinformation" about its intent.[] In a statement, a company spokesperson clarified that the policy was never meant to deny coverage for medically necessary anesthesia services, but rather to address concerns about potential overbilling.
“To be clear, it never was and never will be the policy of Anthem Blue Cross Blue Shield to not pay for medically necessary anesthesia services,” the spokesperson said.[]
A widespread problem
This controversy underscores ongoing tensions between insurers and healthcare providers. Many physicians feel policies like these prioritize cost-cutting over quality care. Anthem BCBS's reversal is a step in the right direction, but the incident serves as a reminder of the need for vigilance when it comes to changes that may impact patient outcomes and physician autonomy.
For those concerned about future policy proposals, the ASA encourages continued advocacy and communication with state insurance commissioners and legislators.