Analysis of Turn Around Time of Claim Settlement Process in Select TPA


Authors : Dr. D. Shreedevi; Dr. Miryala Swathi

Volume/Issue : Volume 10 - 2025, Issue 8 - August


Google Scholar : https://tinyurl.com/396bfe6b

Scribd : https://tinyurl.com/vsctufkm

DOI : https://doi.org/10.38124/ijisrt/25aug978

Note : A published paper may take 4-5 working days from the publication date to appear in PlumX Metrics, Semantic Scholar, and ResearchGate.

Note : Google Scholar may take 30 to 40 days to display the article.


Abstract : The turnaround time (TAT) in the claim settlement process plays a crucial role in determining the efficiency and effectiveness of Third Party Administrators (TPAs) in healthcare and insurance sectors. This study focuses on the factors impacting TAT in the claim settlement process within TPAs, identifying key challenges, bottlenecks, and potential improvements. The data is collected by administering a questionnaire with a sample size of 150 to the selected TPA staff who are working in pre auth department, CRM, billing department and medical scrutiny department and also through direct observations of claims. The Average TAT for the claim settlement process was calculated for 60 cashless, 60 reimbursement, 20 additional payments, and 10 deduction payments claims. The major findings of the study are, the average TAT for cashless, reimbursement, addition payments, and deduction payments claim settlement is 85.05, 66.2, 47.55, 23.7 days respectively. The study also found the reasons for the delay in the claim settlement process and increase of TAT in claim settlement process. Delay in document recovery, delay in processing and dispatching cheques are found as the major reasons. By examining both internal (process management, documentation, claim verification) and external (policyholder behavior, regulatory requirements) factors, the study highlights the importance of optimizing TAT to enhance customer satisfaction and operational efficiency. Some of the suggestions of the study are to increase staff, decrease time for transferring claims and at issue of cheques and has to speed up the claim settlement process.

Keywords : Cashless, Claims, Settlement, TAT, TPA.

References :

[1].    Aggarwal A., Kapoor N., & Gupta A. (2013). Health insurance: Innovation and challenges ahead. Global Journal of Management and Business Studies, 3(5), 475–780.
[2].    Anitha S. (2010). Health Insurance Management and Practices with Special Reference to Third Party Administrator (PhD thesis). Shri Krishnadevaraya University.
[3].    Bearingpoint I. (2008). Private Health Insurance in India: Promise and Reality (pp. 1–254). United States Agency for International Development.
[4].    Beniwal V. (2018). “India flags Low Health Insurance Penetration as Damper to Growth”. Insurance Journal
[5].    Bhat R. (1996). “Regulation of the Private Health Sector in India”. International Journal of Health Planning and Management, 11(3), 253–274.
[6].    Bhat R., Maheshwari S. K., & Saha S. (2005). Third Party Administrators and Health Insurance in India: Perception of Providers and Policyholders (IIMA Working Papers WP2005-01-02). IIM Ahmedabad, Research and Publication Department.
[7].    Burns L. R. (2014). India’s Healthcare Industry: A System Perspective. In Burns L. R. (Ed.), India’s healthcare industry: Innovation in delivery, financing, and manufacturing (pp. 3–37). Cambridge University Press.
[8].    Chatterjee S. (2017). Only 119 hospitals in Karnataka NABH-recognized, few government institutions on list.
[9].    The Times of India.
[10].    Chhatwal V. (2014). Simplifying the Healthcare Ecosystem: The TPA way. In India  Infrastructure Report 2013|14 (1st ed., pp. 135–142). Orient Blackswan.
[11].    Dilawari P., & Koley S. (2016). Health Insurance and Third Party Administrators in India: Awareness and Perception of Policy-holders. International Journal of Science and Research, 5(3), 865–870.
[12].    Dubey D., & Benipal P. (2015). Role of TPAs in the Growth of Health Insurance in India. International Journal of Reviews and Research in Social Sciences, 3(4), 156–158.
[13].    Duggal R. (2011). Private Health Insurance and Access to healthcare. Indian Journal of Medical Ethics, 8(1), 28–30.
[14].    Ellis R. P., Alam M., & Gupta I. (2000). Health insurance in India: Prognosis and Prospectus. Economic & Political Weekly, 35(4), 207–221.
[15].    Garg A. (2013). Satisfaction and Problems of Health Insurance Policyholders in India. International Journal of Banking, Risk and Insurance, 1(2), 43–54.
[16].    Gupta I., Roy A., & Trivedi M. (2004). Third Party Administrators: Theory and Practice. Economic & Political Weekly, 39(28), 3160–3164.
[17].    India Brand Equity Foundation. (2018). Insurance Sector in India: Industry overview, market size & trend. IBEF
[18].    Insurance Bureau of India.
[19].    Jain K., Sinha S. K., Jain D., & Kumar R. (2016). Does Health Insurance Give us an Assurance? A study on the extent of coverage of health insurance at a tertiary care hospital in north India. International Journal of Research Foundation of Hospital & Healthcare Administration, 4(1), 25–30.
[20].    Jayaram R., & Ramakrishnan N. (2013). Reimbursement for Critical Care Services in India. Indian Journal of Critical Care Medicine: Peer-reviewed, 17(1), 1–9.
[21].    Jayaraman V. R. (2014, September 11). 5 things to know about India’s Healthcare System. Forbes India Blog.
[22].    Jeng H.-W. (1996). Third Party Administrator Service Pricing and Incentive Contracts. Journal of Actuarial Practice, 4(2), 209–112.
[23].    Kalnad N., Bose N., & Menon H. (2017, June 7). India’s Great Healthcare Challenge, also an opportunity. Hindustan Times.
[24].    Kumar R., Rangarajan K., & Ranganathan N. (2011). Health Insurance in India—A Study of Provider’s Perceptions in Delhi & the NCR. Journal of Health Management, 13(3), 259–277.
[25].    Mahal A. (2002). Assessing Private Health Insurance in India: Potential Impacts and Regulatory Issues. Economic & Political Weekly, 37(6), 559–571.
[26].    Malhotra S., Patnaik I., Roy S., & Shah A. (2018, May 9). In India, health insurance does not work in a desirable or sustainable manner. NIPFP Working Paper 228, May 2018.
[27].    Mathur V. (2016). Ethical Questions Regarding Health Insurance in India. Indian Journal of Medical Ethics, 8(1), 27.
[28].    Mohapatra S. (2005). A Healthy Ground for TPAs. Journal of Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority, (May), 19–20.
[29].    Mukhopadhyay D. (2018, May). Healthcare Insurance in India: A Few Concerns. Geography & You Pandit D. (2016). Health insurance in India and Third Party Administrators. IOSR Journal of Humanities and Social Science, 21(1), 1–6
[30].    Pareek M. (2018). Prospects for Growth and Issues in the Marketing of Health Insurance in India. Journal of Management Research and Analysis, 5(3), 298–303.
[31].    Samal J., & Dehury R. (2016). An Exploration and Assessment on the Current Status and Trend of TPAs in India. International Journal of Health Sciences and Research, 5(8), 600–604.
[32].    Sengupta A., & Nundy S. (2005). The Private Health Sector in India: Is Burgeoning, but at the Cost of Public Health Care. BMJ: British Medical Journal, 331(7526), 1157–1158.
[33].    Senthil S., & Ramamoorthy R. (2013). Health Insurance Market in India—The way forward. Language in India, 13(4), 178–193.
[34].    Shukla T., & Singh P. (2018). Penetration of Health Insurance in India: Reality or Mirage? Research Journal of Business Management, 08(01), 1–13.
[35].    Srivastava T. (2009). A Critical Appraisal of Third Party Administrator System with Special Reference to Health Insurance Industry (PhD thesis). Dayalbagh Educational Institute.
[36].    Sureka G. P. (2003). TPAs and the Regulator. Journal of Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority, 18–21.

The turnaround time (TAT) in the claim settlement process plays a crucial role in determining the efficiency and effectiveness of Third Party Administrators (TPAs) in healthcare and insurance sectors. This study focuses on the factors impacting TAT in the claim settlement process within TPAs, identifying key challenges, bottlenecks, and potential improvements. The data is collected by administering a questionnaire with a sample size of 150 to the selected TPA staff who are working in pre auth department, CRM, billing department and medical scrutiny department and also through direct observations of claims. The Average TAT for the claim settlement process was calculated for 60 cashless, 60 reimbursement, 20 additional payments, and 10 deduction payments claims. The major findings of the study are, the average TAT for cashless, reimbursement, addition payments, and deduction payments claim settlement is 85.05, 66.2, 47.55, 23.7 days respectively. The study also found the reasons for the delay in the claim settlement process and increase of TAT in claim settlement process. Delay in document recovery, delay in processing and dispatching cheques are found as the major reasons. By examining both internal (process management, documentation, claim verification) and external (policyholder behavior, regulatory requirements) factors, the study highlights the importance of optimizing TAT to enhance customer satisfaction and operational efficiency. Some of the suggestions of the study are to increase staff, decrease time for transferring claims and at issue of cheques and has to speed up the claim settlement process.

Keywords : Cashless, Claims, Settlement, TAT, TPA.

CALL FOR PAPERS


Paper Submission Last Date
30 - November - 2025

Video Explanation for Published paper

Never miss an update from Papermashup

Get notified about the latest tutorials and downloads.

Subscribe by Email

Get alerts directly into your inbox after each post and stay updated.
Subscribe
OR

Subscribe by RSS

Add our RSS to your feedreader to get regular updates from us.
Subscribe