Most people with an ounce of cost-consciousness will try to “make do” with what they already have before spending time and money on something new. This is particularly true when the item they have was acquired at considerable expense. So is it any wonder that hospitals want their occupational health clinics to use existing mainframe information systems, rather than invest in practice management software specifically designed for occupational health?

That choice may be understandable but is unlikely to be economical in the long term. Hospital software systems are generally designed to accommodate a single customer: the patient. But the occupational healthcare provider must accommodate two customers: the patient and the patient’s employer. The employer expects the clinic to handle the patient visit according to its specifications, report back promptly and accurately, help it meet State and Federal monitoring requirements, and provide understandable, comprehensive bills for services.

A successful occupational healthcare clinic must satisfy the needs of the employer, because an employer with unmet needs will probably change providers. Using a hospital software system that is not designed to satisfy the employer’s needs is a subtle but effective way to sabotage the clinic’s business. Conversely, using software that both manages the patient visit and caters to the employer’s needs is a significant advantage in this highly competitive market.

Client companies may stipulate that certain procedures, such as drug and alcohol testing after an accident, be followed during their employees’ visits. They may require the clinic call a specific person for authorization, send the bill for a particular service to a particular place, and honor promised discounts. One company will often have multiple addresses for their bills. Occupational health software such as SYSTOC^® or StolaSystem^® clearly outperforms hospital systems in ensuring that company-specific procedures are followed by virtually building them into the flow of the patient visit.

Client employers want a comprehensive invoice containing all screening services for the billing cycle. One of the major advantages of using SYSTOC or StolaSystem for occupational healthcare billing rather than the hospital mainframe system is the handling of company-paid services like drug testing and pre-placement physicals. Occupational health software can generate a professional looking invoice containing all patients from the specified billing cycle, listing all the services received and subtotals for each patient, with a grand total for the company. Look at the sample invoice (generated from StolaSystem) in figure 1, and compare that to the typical hospital mainframe invoice.

SYSTOC and StolaSystem also have reports that are focused on summarizing activity by the individual company, including tracking revenue trends over time, determining which services are utilized the most, etc. Hospital systems can’t do that. Figure 2 shows one of many such analysis reports that are available (printed from SYSTOC).

The handling of workers’ comp billing is vastly different as well. Specialized software allows you to print and send the progress notes from the visit along with the bill, so the insurance carrier has the information it needs to pay promptly. Such software also contains detailed information that can help clinics answer any payer’s questions quickly and accurately.

Does this mean that a hospital-based occupational health clinic using mainframe software can’t provide the same or similar services and reports to an employer? Not necessarily, but it would take a considerable amount of additional time and effort to do so. And because time is money, the advantages of using software that actually does your work for you as opposed to using “what you have” are clear. Investing in the proper tool for the job is the best long term, cost-effective approach.

[top]

[Return to Winter 2002-2003 main page]