More cancer screenings, clearer definitions, dedicated cancer helplines and support and better access to protection insurance and cost management rank top of advisers’ wish lists for insurers to improve customer experience this World Cancer Day.
To mark World Cancer Day (4 February) Health & Protection threw the question over to advisers to find what is the one thing they would most like insurers to do to improve the customer experience for people with cancer.
More screenings and emotional support
For Joanna Streames, owner of Velvet Mortgage and Insure Services, more screenings should be a priority for insurers.
“I would definitely say more screenings and emotional support as well as the element of advisers playing a part in passing on in more details wraparound benefits the clients have access to within their health and protection policies,” Streames told Health & Protection.
Plain language descriptions
But for Alan Lakey, director at Highclere Financial Services and CIExpert, insurers should prioritise plain language descriptions.
“What insurers mean by cancer and what consumers believe are often two different things,” Lakey explained. “To a typical consumer the staging differences and words such as in situ, borderline malignancy and low malignant potential have no real meaning.
“I would like every insurer to include a plain English description alongside the technical claim wording so that it is understood.
“This would reduce the numbers of claims declined for not meeting the definition, reduce complaints to the Ombudsman and also increase confidence in the product and financial services in general.”
Change of mindset
And for Amelie Dionne-Charest , co-founder and managing director of insurance broker Alea in Hong Kong, people diagnosed with cancer while within their policy contract should have their therapy session coverage stretched for over a year.
“Some insurers still cover it under post hospitalisation with a limit that may not cover the entire course of treatment,” she noted.
But there should also be consideration for people diagnosed with cancer before taking out a policy, Dionne-Charest said.
“It is definitely a no-go-zone for all insurers, with cancer exclusion or rejection of the application,” she continued. “That mindset needs to change, especially if there has already been a one-year remission.
“The standard market practice is for the applicant to have between three to five years of remission period before being considered, which for certain simple cancers is too harsh.
“People who have had early stage cancers or benign tumours removed and who are in total remission for more than three years, should be covered by health insurance providers and should not be subject to policy exclusions or application rejection.
But there are also some additional benefits that providers could consider, Dionne-Charest added.
“Insurance providers should also consider providing extra mental health benefits and complementary medicine benefits to people who have been diagnosed with cancer,” she said.
Cost management
Among his wish list Brett Hill, head of health and protection at Broadstone, called for a specific cancer helpline.
“A specific cancer direct helpline for members with short form member ID process (such as a personalised password) is needed so they don’t need to go through a call handler and repeat their details during an already stressful time,” Hill said.
But Hill also called for insurers to address costs of cancer treatment.
“Working directly with the consultant – is there an opportunity to fund treatment in the same facility through a blended mix of NHS and insurer funding to share the cost?” Hill continued.
“That could possibly be facilitated by a round table discussion with the relevant parties to understand if the proposal of NHS funding/provision of some parts of the treatment plan is acceptable. Some clients may not be willing to ask staff to utilise NHS services for part of their cancer journey, while others may be more pragmatic in pursuit of sustainable healthcare pricing.
“We also need greater transparency about the care difference between NHS and private sector for cancer treatment, and whether some treatments may be better delivered and funded by NHS, such as stem cell transplants or biological therapies.”
This focus on cost management, Hill explained, could also extend to non-medical.
“They could also incorporate some cash-plan type benefits for additional, non-medical costs such as hospital car parking, taxi fares to follow-up appointments for members who can’t drive, or childcare for appointments, things the member would really value to help cope with the every day costs of living with cancer,” Hill continued.
“They could review greater use of oral drugs or home administration of chemotherapy, minimising in-clinic treatment for greater patient convenience.
“They could also challenge fees robustly, identify and track savings made for the client, and report on these as part of the claims MI produced for employers to demonstrate the outcomes in terms of savings made against their claims fund.
“Part of the reason why claims costs for cancer have increased is late diagnosis due to reduced numbers of F2F NHS GP appointments and disruption to NHS screening services.
“Insurers should consider the inclusion of a routine cancer screening benefit as an optional benefit for company schemes, to support early diagnosis and help employers reduce the impact of high treatment costs on the claims fund further down the line.”
Better access to protection insurance
Alan Knowles, co-managing director at Cura Financial Services, told Health & Protection he would like to see better access to protection insurance for people with histories of higher staging cancers.
“Much of Europe is now forgetting ‘cancer’ after 10 years for underwriting, but the UK is still declining most cases for histories of stage-4 cancer regardless of timeframes. That leaves us way behind,” he added.
For Andrew Wilkinson, director at Moneysworth Life Insurance, spiralling NHS treatment times are main concern.
“I was struck by the news over the past 24 hours about delays in the NHS for cancer,” Wilkinson said.
“We can debate solutions as much as we like, but for people already waiting for the treatment to begin, such debates are academic with the risk of death increasing 10% for each four week period of delay – at least that’s what the NHS is saying.
“My dream wish would be that in some way insurers could reduce these waiting times or provide access to an alternative source of treatment to try and save some lives here.
“Its probably too much to ask but it could make such a difference to those who are unable to access treatment in a timely manner from the NHS.”
Though Isaac Feiner, managing director of Lifepoint Healthcare, was keen to laud insurers for the work they already do.
“I happen to think that insurers overall truly deserve applause and do a truly marvellous job when it comes to cancer. It’s good that insurers who read the articles get encouragement,” Feiner said.
“If you are feeling a bit off piste.. one thing that has come up on rare occasions is to consider how there can more integration of trial drugs, or some drugs used for other cancers to treat another cancer.
“For example a few years ago we had a gentlemen with a brain tumour, who subsequently died. At the time the doctors wanted to try treat him with a breast cancer drug, but the insurer declined on the basis that it had not been proven to work for the brain tumour,” Feiner continued.
“As a result the family paid abut £40,000 out of personal money to pay for this treatment.
“It’s a tough one to broach as we need to ask ‘where does it actually end and how can it be sustained by insurers if they allow members to go down this route of trial and error.
“Its also very hard to talk about because I know insurers are so compassionate.. but maybe some more analyses to see how these scenarios can be changed.
“But yes, overall insurers do a wonderful job and we are grateful.”