The most important difference in state workers’ compensation systems is who
chooses the treating physician. In general, workers’ compensation costs are
lower is states where the company chooses the medical care providers, and
higher where the patient has the choice. Although it is tempting to infer
sinister reasons for this, the difference is similar in personal medical care
insurance. When the company chooses the providers, the workers’
compensation system tends to resemble managed care or health maintenance
organizations (HMOs). A limited number of providers are used by the employer
or its insurance company. These providers are generally chosen because they
are convenient and cooperative. They may be asked to sign provider contracts
to accept reduced fees. If the outcomes are not good, if the employees are not
getting well and quickly returning to regular work, the provider will be dropped
from the program.
If the employee chooses the physician, the system works more like
indemnification insurance. There are no negotiated discounts to reduce the fee-
for-service costs. The patients tend to “doctor shop” until they find a physician
who agrees with their opinions. And the employee may be given more time off
for rest and recovery. Most states have a system for excluding specific
physicians from providing workers’ compensation care if they are clearly
biased, but the situations are usually extreme. The independent medical
examiner who did not find a single permanent injury in 20 years of exams, and
the orthopedist who took the employee off all work for six months for a
sprained finger are equally unacceptable to the state administrators. They are
not exercising good medical judgment, they are selling paper.
Any physician who is providing care for a work-related injury should base the
decisions about care on his or her best medical judgment. As with any other
payment system, it is not legal or ethical to withhold necessary care because it
may not be covered by the insurance. On the other hand, providing care that is
not indicated or giving employees time off that is not justified borders on fraud.
One practice must be avoided because it is fraud: employees may ask their
personal physician to treat them for a work-related injury and bill the charges
to their personal health insurance. Their motives may be as benign as
preferring the doctor they know and trust. However, their motives may be
more complicated. The employee may be dissatisfied with the amount of
treatment or time off they can obtain through the workers’ compensation
system. The company may have policies or incentives that encourage
employees to say that a work injury is not work related. Or the employee may
simply not understand that it is illegal to lie about whether an injury occurred
at work.
Medical care providers should be very careful about treating work injuries as
though they were personal. If the patient is already being treated when the
physician learns that this may be work related, the physician should contact the
employer immediately. Treating a workers’ compensation injury as personal
just to be sure you get paid is clearly fraud against the health insurer and may
be a specific crime under the state’s insurance laws.