[Skip to content]

GoSomething to say?
Join the forum, ask us a question, or comment
on the blog
Search our Site
Email Newsletter
Sign up for our free weekly
newsletter
Advertisement
.

What does healthcare reform mean to the US medical tourism market?

Stack of papers

Irving Stackpole, President of  Stackpole & Associates, Inc., a market research, customer service and sales training, and marketing services firm looks at the likely implications of the Affordable Care Act (ACA)  reforms on the US medical tourism market. Good news....? Or bad?

There is much speculation about the impact of US healthcare reform on the medical tourism sector. Pro-medical tourism pundits paint a rosy picture. Naysayers predict that the sector will wither and die. Few facts are cited, possibly because the Affordable Care Act (ACA) or "Obamacare" is a complex document of almost 1,000 pages. It is doubtful that many people have read it and fewer still who understand its vast implications.

I have read the Affordable Care Act..... all 900 plus pages of it. If you’re involved in US medical tourism, I will aim to provide you with a deeper understanding of the changes to the US healthcare system as well as guidance for business planning purposes for organizations involved in international health travel.

What is the Affordable Act?

 The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) is a United States Federal statute signed into law on March 23, 2010. The law (along with the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010) is referred to as the "Affordable Care Act" and is the most sweeping social legislation in the US in the past forty years. The Affordable Care Act (ACA) creates changes that will have significant impact on the way healthcare is insured, practiced, and paid for, with the Federal government playing a central role. Clearly ACA has important implications for medical tourism.

The major provisions of the ACA as they relate to the medical tourism sector

 As background, some of the provisions of ACA went into effect immediately while others will be rolled out gradually until full implementation in 2019. Going forward, it is unlikely that Congress will repeal the provisions that are already in effect but Congress may amend or repeal other provisions that are to go into effect in the future. In addition, there are court challenges to portions of the law. We will have to wait and see if there are other changes to ACA that are unknown at this point in time.

  • First, unless revised by a ruling of the Supreme Court or if further implementation of the legislation is blocked by the US Congress or a newly-elected President, by 2014 all individuals will be required to obtain health insurance or pay a fine. This provision means that ACA will substantially reduce the number of 49 million individuals in the United States who are currently uninsured. Assuming that these uninsured individuals have been a good market for medical tourism, they may postpone non-urgent healthcare services until covered by ACA in 2014 anticipating that the services they want may be covered by health insurance.
  • Second, ACA defines, expands and standardizes the services that must be offered by health insurance companies. Services such as preventive health services (weight loss clinics, routine check-ups) and mental health services must be included in health insurance. These essential benefits delivered to even more people covered by insurance will be more costly to provide thereby driving up health insurance premiums. Individuals who were uninsured and who might have sought medical tourism services for uncovered procedures will now be able to obtain these services in the US as part of their insurance coverage. It is important to note that dental care and cosmetic surgery are not services that are mandated to be covered under ACA.
  • Third, adding over 30 million people* to the US healthcare system will increase demand on hospitals and doctors. There is already a shortage of doctors in the United States with many hospitals operating at or near capacity. More people with health insurance will increase the demands on the overburdened healthcare system resulting in delays, waiting lists for services, and postponement of non-urgent care.

With the cost of health insurance rising, individuals will look for ways to reduce the cost of purchasing insurance. Common ways to reduce the cost of health insurance is to increase the amount of deductibles and co-payments but overall, the cost of health insurance will continue to rise. Premiums, co-pays and deductibles - so called "out of pocket" costs - will all increase so that accessing medical services will become more costly to individuals, encouraging them to look for other creative ways to save money.

Here is an example of how insurance companies have already started shifting more costs to consumers while limiting access. The article, "Tiered health plans cutting costs, restricting options", appeared in the November 28, 2011 edition of the Boston Globe.

 It is projected that by 2015, the economic impact of the ACA will be felt across the country by consumers who will be paying more out of pocket and experiencing delays in obtaining services. Medical tourism will be an attractive alternative to paying high out of pocket costs or waiting for services.

  • Fourth, medical tourism marketers should also note that large group, self-insured plans like General Electric are exempt from many requirements of ACA, as are private health insurance plans that were in effect when the law was passed, unless they change their benefits plans. It is not clear if adding a medical travel benefit will be considered a "change" as defined by ACA. Until this definition is clear, these insurance companies may not want to risk adding this benefit if it puts them at risk of having to comply with all of the provisions of ACA.


The short and long term opportunities for the medical tourism sector

 The traditional services that have been the most popular medical tourism services will continue to be in demand. These services include:

  • Dental and cosmetic procedures
  • Fertility treatments
  • Bariatric surgery
  • Stem cell treatments
  • Procedures that are not available in the US

In the mid to long term, healthcare providers should look for additional opportunities to deliver services for which there are delays or waiting lists or for which consumers must pay high out of pocket costs.

The short term and long term challenges for medical tourism

Right now, health insurance plans are trying to sort out the impacts of the ACA, and so they are not good marketing targets for destinations or providers trying to access the US market. Until the impact of the ACA legislation is clear to them, they will hesitate to view medical tourism as a viable option.

Also, ACA repeats and reinforces the long-standing prohibition of foreign healthcare providers being reimbursed by the US Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Those individuals who are covered by Medicare or Medicaid (instead of private health insurance) can choose to pay out of pocket for services from a non-US provider but it is unlikely that many people will select this course of action if the Government pays for those same services in the US.

 Remember that individuals who receive benefits from the Department of Veterans Affairs are paid for by the US government and are not subject to the same prohibition as Medicare and Medicaid recipients. In other words, foreign providers may continue to deliver services to US veterans and receive payment.

 Until the US Supreme Court rules on the ACA related cases before it early in 2012, and the results of the 2012 election are known, a considerable amount of uncertainly will persist as the provisions of ACA are enacted, tested and refined. This uncertainly has a major impact on health insurance companies and their willingness to engage with the medical tourism sector. While the demand for traditional medical tourism services should remain strong and perhaps even grow, it may be another 2-5 years before demand for other types of services will return.

*Of the 49 million people in the United States currently without health insurance, it is estimated that 16 – 19 million will remain uninsured after ACA. These individuals include people who choose to defy the law and opt to pay the fine as well as those who are in the US without proper documentation.


Date published: 02 December 2011

Share |
Comment

Profile of the author

Irving Stackpole

Irving L. Stackpole, RRT, M.ED.  has over thirty years of experience in healthcare, senior living and human services. Irving Stackpole is the President of Stackpole & Associates, Inc., a market research, customer service and sales training, and marketing services firm. Founded in 1991, Stackpole & Associates applies scientific marketing principles to develop practical solutions to clients’ challenges. Working with healthcare providers, facilitators, associations, governments, and developers involved in medical tourism, Stackpole & Associates helps clients reach the customers they want to find by creating effective marketing messages and delivering those messages through highly targeted and affordable channels to maximize return on investment. You can reach Irving at: istackpole@stackpoleassociates.com.   

Add your comments below

Comments provided below do not represent the views of IMTJ. Comments will be published "as is" and will not be edited by IMTJ staff. IMTJ is hosting these comments, and is not  undertaking an editorial role in the content of these comments. However, it is editorial policy not to publish comments which have been submitted anonymously.

Use the comment submission form below
Due respect, but Irving's analysis and conclusions couldn't be more wrong.

He also misses the health tourism potential of federal reform. I have spent much of the last six months writing a book on reform and my take is very different: Very soon, every health care purchase becomes a downward driver on costs and an upward driver on quality.

This sentence, for example misses the whole sweep of reform, conceptually and practically, it is flat out wrong: “These essential benefits delivered to even more people covered by insurance will be more costly to provide thereby driving up health insurance premiums.” Over the last ten years, medical costs have gone up four times faster than inflation. Reform is the only real hope of reversing the value-destroying health industry dynamics of the last 30 years.

Adding 30 million to the rolls will, indeed, be hard to absorb structurally, but create a real problem only if one assumes other factors stay constant. They won't. The practical solution will be empowered nurse practitioners, right-sized lifting of provider restrictions and, finally, meaningful use of technology in medical practice to increase productivity. The 30 million may also be a tipping point for the adoption of health travel. Dr. Shetty's Cayman Island project sure seems to be counting on it.

Apples to apples comparisons between Massachusetts care and federal reform are false. For starters, Massachusetts concedes that they worked on the expansion of coverage without working on the cost component (which federal reform addresses in all the structural reforms taking place concurrently…like ACOs and electronic health records). Irving seems to blame federal reform when the anger should be directed at insurers.

On point: Under federal reform, the largest out of pocket for most Americans will be $2500. In this same vein, a medical travel benefit could be seen as “tiered” because it requires extra burden….but in return for a very low premium price…I would take that deal in a minute. Personally, I think choices are a good thing.

Opportunities
I agree with the short and long term opportunities section but add this….One of the big hold-backs of health travel adoption is that the best target customer was large companies. The new health insurance exchanges (a fancy name for “store”) are specifically for individuals and small businesses (under 50 employees). This means appeals for health travel benefits from insurance providers can be made directly to individuals who will be less concerned with the liability if something goes wrong. I think it will create a sea change in demand.

The exchanges are tasked with providing very high value coverage benefits and I see all kinds of daylight for exchange participants in at least some states to offer real offshore coverage. At least one of the insurance carriers on each exchange must be a “cooperative” non-profit. I believe it is reasonable to assume that co-ops will deliver top care options at about 30% lower premiums. Medicare recipients won't get reimbursed for offshore care anytime soon but by my estimate…25 million private sector insureds are huge potential customers.

Disagree again about the 20 million who will remain uninsured. This population will be almost solely, undocumented Americans.

As for SCOTUS, the mandate isn't really the most hated part of reform, but it holds the best chance for the radical right to prevail. In another time, the word “mandate” could just as easily have been called, “the personal responsibility clause”.

Important
The new US healthcare policy is to cover more people at lower costs. The way to effect that is to improve health care quality and transparency. The strategy to implement the policy is simply this: value = medical outcomes ÷ dollars spent. And, measurement is the change agent. If you understand this paragraph….you understand how federal reform changes health care.

You can already see progress at www.healthcare.gov in the provider ratings and also in the ease of shopping for new insurance.

I'm happy to help anyone understand the topic more: ScottFrankum @ gmail.com

Scott Frankum (07/12/2011 00:24:30)

Actually, what the ACA states is that self insured employers would be able to improve coverage to their members without risk of penalty. They would only be at risk if they tried to reduce benefits. Adding an international medical travel option for members while waiving members' out-of-pocket is clearly an IMPROVEMENT in benefits since it avails the employee to better care at lower out-of-pocket amounts.

Joseph Cronin (05/12/2011 20:57:25)

I agree with the conclusions. The '49 million uninsured " has been quoted for years as a reason for countries and companies to offer medical tourism.Most of this market is a non-starter as they are too poor, unemployed, illegal, or just not interested in healthcare.Many of those deliberately refusing to pay for insurance, just as they refuse to insure or tax their cars- are so anti government, business and foreigners that the idea of going abroad for care is not within their understanding.

In my report on medical tourism and insurance I investigated all those announced deals of recent years for employers and.or insurers to send people abroad- and found that half had died, three failed due to corruption, and if you take out the cross-border Mexico covers for nearby states-that all those big insurers certain people are always claiming to be on the brink of offering medical tourism, have stepped away for the reasons you note.

At present , the big health insurers are fighting - and currently losing - a battle to exempt expatriate healthcare from the new laws -and if they lose this battle,the chances of them offering medical tourism as a benefit becomes zero.Even if they win, the battle will make them very cautious of mixing domestic corporate healthcare and medical tourism.

I agree that medical tourism for Americans will continue to be on healthcare not covered by health insurance, and those using healthcare reform to sell their wares,are peddling false hopes to countries and hospitals.


Ian Youngman (05/12/2011 15:44:12)