Benchmarking is a popular tool in revenue cycle management. It's used to gauge a practice's performance against industry standards. But let's be real—national averages often mislead more than they illuminate. They can lull you into a false sense of security or, worse, panic you into unnecessary changes. Understanding why these benchmarks may not apply to your practice is crucial.
Why National Averages Fail
There's a fundamental flaw in relying on national averages: they don't consider your specific reality. Averages blend outliers and ignore regional differences, payer quirks, and specialty-specific challenges. For example, a practice in New York City with a heavy Medicaid focus looks nothing like a boutique cash-only practice in Iowa. Yet both might compare themselves to the same national benchmark. That's problematic.
Consider denial rates. The Medical Group Management Association (MGMA) reports an average denial rate of 7-10%. But what if your practice specializes in complex oncology treatments? Your denial rate might be higher simply because insurers scrutinize these claims more. National averages don't account for this detail. They lump all practices together, leading to irrelevant comparisons.
The Specialty Factor
Specialty nuances can't be ignored. They drastically affect metrics like average reimbursement and denial rates. A cardiology practice, for instance, has a different procedure mix and payer interaction than a pediatric practice. An orthopedic surgeon might have superb revenue per encounter, yet a higher rate of prior authorization delays. Contrast that with a primary care provider who deals with a higher volume of lower-reimbursement visits.
It's essential to tailor benchmarks to reflect your specialty's unique challenges and opportunities. Instead of chasing an arbitrary national average, dive into specialty-specific data. Seek out societies or associations that provide detailed benchmarks. Compare apples to apples—not apples to baseballs.
The Payer Mix Puzzle
Your payer mix heavily influences financial performance. A practice with a 60% Medicare mix will have vastly different cash flow dynamics than one that's 80% commercial. Medicare's reimbursement rates are typically lower but more predictable. Meanwhile, commercial payers might offer higher rates but introduce convoluted contract stipulations and erratic delays.
A national benchmark might suggest you should collect 98% of billed charges. Utopian for some, unrealistic for others. Practices that rely heavily on Medicaid, for instance, often manage with thinner margins and lower collection rates. Understanding your payer mix is non-negotiable. Tailor benchmarks to reflect your payer realities, not an average that includes settings nothing like yours.
Practice Size and Complexity
The size of your operation matters. A 50-location group practice with centralized billing processes will have different efficiencies and inefficiencies compared to a single-location practice. Larger practices can leverage economies of scale, but they also face coordination challenges. National benchmarks don't account for this complexity.
Billing staff in a large practice might have the luxury of specialization—dedicated roles for specific tasks, such as denial management or coding. Smaller practices require generalists. This impacts productivity benchmarks and error rates. When setting goals, consider your practice’s scale and the impact it has on your operations.
Creating Relevant Benchmarks
So, what's the solution? Create benchmarks that speak directly to your practice's unique circumstances. Start by segmenting your data. Break down your revenue cycle metrics by specialty, payer type, and location. Analyze trends over time and watch for anomalies.
Talk to your billers. These professionals live in the trenches. They know which payers drag their feet and which denial reasons are rampant. Their insights often reveal more than a report ever could.
Build a custom dashboard. Use your practice management system to create visuals that highlight key performance indicators tailored to your practice. Denial rates, average days in A/R, net collection rate—all should be specific to your mix and realities.
Invest in data analytics tools that allow for real-time insights rather than static reports. The more granular you get, the better you’ll understand the metrics that truly matter.
Conclusion: A New Benchmark for Success
National averages have their place, but they shouldn't set your target. They’re a starting point—not the finish line. Focus on creating benchmarks that encapsulate your practice's unique complexities. This is where true insight lies.
By aligning benchmarks with your practice's characteristics, you set realistic, actionable goals. You’ll find that using data tailored to your circumstances not only guides you to better financial health but also fosters a practice culture that thrives on informed decision-making. Now that's a real benchmark for success.
Related Articles
