SB67

I am writing as a New Hampshire-based Sports Medicine physician whose practice and patients would be directly and detrimentally affected by this bill to limit appeals for patients covered under Workman's Compensation. Currently, even under conditions that do not limit time for appeals, there are severe challenges in gaining coverage for some patients that clearly have a work-related condition or injury. Then, when coverage has been granted, gaining approval from the WC system often takes weeks for something as simple as an outpatient test, not to mention complex corrective surgery. Any denial then adds to the complexity and work involved, requiring appeals which have their own delays. All of this delays timely and appropriate care for the patient and requires additional time that many busy physicians do not have in our day for appeals and peer-to-peer reviews. WC patients are also often referred for independent medical evaluation, which itself adds delays, and over which I have no control. In addition to frustrating my work with these patients my staff is burdened in dealing with the time delays, complex and repetitive paperwork, and care denials that often accompany WC cases. I urge the defeat of this bill limiting WC appeals to a 90-day time frame. It is an onerous, deleterious and unnecessary limit on providing proper care for patients who are already stressed due to work injury, inability to return to work, and bureaucracy that makes care challenging as things currently stand.

I am writing as a New Hampshire-based orthopaedic surgeon whose practice and patients would be directly and detrimentally affected by this bill to limit appeals for patients covered under Workman's Compensation. Currently, even under conditions that do not limit time for appeals, there are severe challenges in gaining coverage for some patients that clearly have a work-related condition or injury. Then, when coverage has been granted, gaining approval from the WC system often takes weeks for something as simple as an outpatient test, not to mention complex corrective surgery. Any denial then adds to the complexity and work involved, requiring appeals which have their own delays. All of this delays timely and appropriate care for the patient and requires additional time that many busy surgeons do not have in our day for appeals and peer-to-peer reviews. WC patients are also often referred for independent medical evaluation, which itself adds delays, and over which I have no control. In addition to frustrating my work with these patients my staff is burdened in dealing with the time delays, complex and repetitive paperwork, and care denials that often accompany WC cases. I urge the defeat of this bill limiting WC appeals to a 90-day time frame. It is an onerous, deleterious and unnecessary limit on providing proper care for patients who are already stressed due to work injury, inability to return to work, and bureaucracy that makes care challenging as things currently stand.

I am a physician practicing New Hampshire for the past 18 years, frequently caring for patients with a Workmen's Compensation claims. Limiting the time for appeal would be very detrimental to the practice, our ability to care for patients, and appropriately care for the staff in our office. . There is often confusion regarding the patient's status when they first arrive, even before we begin to work diagnosis and treatment. To limit appeal time to less than 3 months is not fair to the patient, their employers who pay for the insurance, and my office and staff will care for them. Please vote opposed to the proposed bill to limit time for Workmen's Compensation insurance appeal. Matthew Hawkins, MD

Good Day I am a physician practicing New Hampshire for the past 18 years, frequently caring for patients with a Workmen's Compensation claims. Limiting the time for appeal would be very detrimental to the practice, our ability to care for patients, and appropriately care for the staff in our office. . There is often confusion regarding the patient's status when they first arrive, even before we begin to work diagnosis and treatment. To limit appeal time to less than 3 months is not fair to the patient, their employers who pay for the insurance, and my office and staff will care for them. Please vote opposed to the proposed bill to limit time for Workmen's Compensation insurance appeal.

By limiting the amount of time to appeal WC claims, the injured patients and their MD will have even more challenges than already exist to be able to address the needs of a patient.

April 2, 2025 Dear Members of the NH House Standing Committee, I am writing on behalf of Mobility Bone & Joint Institute, a division of Northeast Orthopaedic Alliance, a longstanding practice comprised of 26 dedicated providers who have been serving the state of New Hampshire for forty years. Our commitment to delivering high-quality orthopedic care to workers' compensation patients is unwavering; however, we must express our strong opposition to bill SB 67-FN concerning workers’ compensation and the resolution of payment disputes. Healthcare providers are already assuming significant risks when treating workers' compensation patients. The inherent delays in receiving insurance information often complicate our ability to deliver timely care, necessitating immediate treatment without any assurance of payment. This precarious situation places undue financial strain on providers, who are subsequently underpaid an estimated 60% of the time for worker’s compensation claims. We are then burdened with the responsibility of appealing for accurate payments, a request frequently overlooked and necessitating multiple interactions with adjusters. Imposing a 90-day appeals limit will only exacerbate the workload for adjusters and the Department of Labor by increasing the number of individual claim appeals, contrary to our current practice of bundling appeals for patients who require multiple services. This bill would increase underpayments, heighten the challenge of securing payments, and deter medical professionals from treating workers' compensation cases, thereby restricting patient access to essential and often urgent care. Healthcare providers are prepared to operate within a reasonable timely filing framework and firmly believe that, given the patients' ability to appeal for workers' compensation coverage within 18 months, providers should be granted the same timeframe to challenge payment inaccuracies. Additionally, we advocate for parameters mandating adjusters to reply within 30 days to our requests for payment negotiations, penalizing non-compliance with full payment of charges. Concord Orthopaedics has consistently worked to keep workers' compensation fees low in New Hampshire, and we fear that the enactment of this bill will adversely affect access to care. We urge you to reconsider the implications of bill SB 67-FN and protect the integrity and viability of care for workers' compensation patients. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, William H. Sullivan Mobility Bone & Joint Institute, a division of Northeast Orthopaedic Alliance PLLC bsullivan@mbji.com 978-771-1901