Insurance A/R vs. patient A/R: two workflows, not one.
Insurance A/R and patient A/R behave differently and need separate workflows — mixing them buries problems in both. Insurance A/R is worked by payer follow-up, denials, and appeals against contractual deadlines; patient A/R is worked by statements, reminders, and point-of-service collection. Reporting them together hides a denial problem behind slow patient payments, or vice versa.
What actually matters
- Separate the two on every aging report — they have different causes, cadences, and levers
- Insurance A/R: payer follow-up, denial appeals, underpayment recovery — driven by contractual and timely-filing deadlines
- Patient A/R: estimates, point-of-service collection, statements, and payment plans — driven by patient behavior
- A blended over-90 bucket hides which side is actually leaking; split it to see the real problem
- Staff the two differently — the skills for appealing a payer and for collecting a patient balance aren't the same
Common questions
Why separate insurance and patient A/R?
Because the money moves for different reasons. Insurance A/R responds to payer follow-up and appeals within contractual deadlines; patient A/R responds to estimates, statements, and point-of-service collection. Tracked together, a denial problem and a patient-collection problem cancel out in the numbers and neither gets fixed.
Where Volari fits: Volari works the insurance side — the denied and underpaid claims where the payer, not the patient, owes you — so that half of your A/R gets worked while your team focuses on patient balances.
See the revenue you're owed but never collected.
A free assessment shows your real recoverable number from denied and underpaid claims. No risk, paid only on what we recover.