Doctors across the U.S. say automated insurance downcoding is cutting payments and threatening patient care.
Doctors around the country are increasingly finding themselves in a frustrating and costly battle with health insurance companies. At the center of the dispute is a process called “downcoding,” where insurers pay doctors for a lower level of care than what was actually provided. The practice, once rare, has become widespread as insurance companies adopt algorithms and third-party programs to manage billing decisions automatically. For many small medical offices, it feels less like a mistake and more like being found “guilty until proven innocent.”
At Hudson Family Practice in Ohio, family doctor Terry Wagner noticed that payments from Aetna suddenly began to shrink. Visits that should have paid around $170 were being reimbursed for about $125. The insurance company had quietly downgraded the billing codes, classifying detailed, time-consuming visits as simpler ones. To get the full amount owed, Wagner’s staff had to file appeals and submit more documentation, a process that drained both time and resources. He described the situation as “blatantly disrespectful,” explaining that a computer seemed to be making judgment calls about medical decisions without ever reviewing his patient notes.
This pattern is not unique to Aetna. Anthem, Cigna, Humana, and other large insurers have acknowledged using downcoding programs on certain types of claims. They argue that these systems protect against overbilling and ensure consistency across practices. But many doctors see it differently. They believe it’s a quiet cost-cutting tactic that punishes honest physicians while threatening the financial stability of small, community-based offices.
Dermatologist Sarah Jensen in Missouri said her practice has lost thousands of dollars to Anthem’s downcoding system. After months of appeals, she has recovered only part of the missing payments. Each appeal requires significant effort, and the mental toll adds up. “It wears you down,” she said. With two offices to manage, she cannot afford to reject Anthem patients, even though the insurer’s reimbursements have become unreliable.
Insurance industry representatives say the policies target only a small number of “outlier” practices that bill more aggressively than peers. They insist these measures promote “affordability” and “quality.” Yet to doctors like Jensen and Wagner, it feels like an accusation of wrongdoing with little transparency or due process. Many have asked insurers to explain how the algorithms determine coding decisions, but clear answers are rare.
Physicians’ groups, including the American Medical Association, have warned that automatic downcoding could harm patient care. When reimbursements shrink, doctors often face impossible choices: shorten appointments, accept fewer insurance plans, or see more patients per day. For some, the pressure leads to burnout or the decision to sell their practices to hospital systems or private equity firms. “It’s going to worsen patient care, but it’s going to improve their bottom line,” said AMA president Bobby Mukkamala.
Billing specialists say the administrative burden is equally damaging. In small practices, staff members must spend hours pulling medical records and crafting appeal letters. Some offices report losing thousands in unpaid staff time alone. One billing manager in rural Ohio compared the process to “breaking down Fort Knox,” saying insurers rarely provide human contacts who can explain or fix the issue.
The problem is compounded by the shrinking number of independent practices nationwide. Many doctors who once ran their own offices have already joined larger health systems because of insurance hurdles and rising administrative costs. Those who remain independent often feel squeezed from both ends—by insurers that pay less and by the extra workload that comes with proving they deserve full reimbursement.
Several states have tried to address downcoding through legislation. A few laws now require more transparency from insurers, but broader efforts to ban automatic or algorithm-based downcoding have stalled. The AMA has drafted a model bill that states can adopt, but widespread reform remains elusive.
For now, the battle continues claim by claim. Doctors file appeals, sometimes winning small victories, often losing money and patience. Many describe it as “death by a thousand cuts,” where every denied or reduced payment chips away at their ability to stay independent. The stakes are not only financial. As small practices disappear, patients in many communities could face fewer options for care and longer wait times. In the end, the question is whether cost-saving algorithms are helping the health care system—or quietly hollowing it out from within.
Join the conversation!