Integrated Shield Plan

[Windwaver]

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.
 

[Thaiyotakamli]

Its true that when pte doc see patient have IP goes overcharge and do more unnecessary checks

[badlammy]

Specialists panel is like authorised workshop.

You can imagine what will happen if there is an as-charged plan for any workshop.

[Rayleigh]

9 hours ago, Thaiyotakamli said:

Its true that when pte doc see patient have IP goes overcharge and do more unnecessary checks

I have to fully agree with your statement. 

[Mustank]

10 hours ago, Thaiyotakamli said:

Its true that when pte doc see patient have IP goes overcharge and do more unnecessary checks

I think next time health insurance will be like cat insurance

Heng I choose govt hospital 

nobody can say govt hospital got trick

[Thaiyotakamli]

1 minute ago, Mustank said:

I think next time health insurance will be like cat insurance

Heng I choose govt hospital 

nobody can say govt hospital got trick

U go govt hospitals need to wait longer and many times they use patients as guinea pig for their intern doc as well as lab experiments😅

[Mustank]

Just now, Thaiyotakamli said:

U go govt hospitals need to wait longer and many times they use patients as guinea pig for their intern doc as well as lab experiments😅

Won’t lah

You must believe in our govt lah 

[SiLangKia]

3 minutes ago, Mustank said:

I think next time health insurance will be like cat insurance

Heng I choose govt hospital 

nobody can say govt hospital got trick

You insuring your pussy ah😂

[Thaiyotakamli]

Just now, Mustank said:

Won’t lah

You must believe in our govt lah 

We had bad experiences with govt hospitals including NUH, SGH and CGH

 

now my mother rather pay 30% for pte treatment than 100% free at govt hospital lol

[13177]

1 hour ago, Thaiyotakamli said:

U go govt hospitals need to wait longer and many times they use patients as guinea pig for their intern doc as well as lab experiments😅

Still can go govt hospitals but as a private patient lo, think charges still cheaper than private hospitals. Then you can choose the doctor and waiting time should be shorter. 

Using patients as guinea pig for their intern doc maybe true, esp if you go to NUH since NUH is near to their medical school, many intern doc and medical students always go to ward to disturb patients. Lol.

Edited April 21, 2021 by 13177

[Kangadrool]

So if our plan is to just use public hospital, should we just stick with CPF cover or upgrade to IP?

[Jamesc]

Oh no

The problem of over medication.

[Mason016]

Plus 1

[Windwaver]

1 hour ago, Kangadrool said:

So if our plan is to just use public hospital, should we just stick with CPF cover or upgrade to IP?

IP if you want more features like higher limits, longer pre/pos coverage, these are not available in standard medishield life.

 

[Wind30]

.... my old classmate group chat actually talked about this in quite a detail

14 hours ago, Windwaver said:

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.
 

if SMA got time, please handle all the patient complaints first... it takes like years for a complaint to even get a hearing??? duh....

[Windwaver]

3 hours ago, Thaiyotakamli said:

We had bad experiences with govt hospitals including NUH, SGH and CGH

 

now my mother rather pay 30% for pte treatment than 100% free at govt hospital lol

Doctor inexperience or long waiting time?

 

[Etnt]

i'm fine with public healthcare, just a steep onboarding curve via long wait time for initial appointment and the initial filtering by severity.

Thereafter it's quite prompt actually once you are in the system

[Thaiyotakamli]

8 minutes ago, Windwaver said:

Doctor inexperience or long waiting time?

 

Both
 

even if ask senior consultant or prof doc still same, experienced but no patience. 
 

pte doctors more experienced, patience and no rush, explain also more clear. 
 

also pte doctors tend to build relationships and retain patients. If public many times the doc bochup attitude, take it or leave it service. 
 

Public can go if its A&E