[gen220]

Yep! There are a large number of benefits for both the provider and the patient, for purchasing elective procedures without involving insurance. It's kind of like how when you get a minor fender bender, it can be easier to settle things directly than to go through insurance. No overhead, like you suggest.

However, it's hard to replace insurance for nonelective/emergency procedures (heart attack, stroke, aggressive cancers).

Insurance-tailored billing systems are really geared towards non-elective procedures (that's where all the money is). When they encroach on the "normal" stuff, it feels invasive.

Advocating for the insurance infrastructure, there is a preponderance of medical waste out there. Doctors prescribe blood tests, urine samples, or MRI scans even though they aren't medically-necessary, just because the hospital group needs to make some money. When the patient is paying, they are on the lookout for medical waste, because they don't want to pay.

Of course, this means that there will be false negatives from the insurance carrier, when they try to clamp down on medical waste. The only loser in this game is the patient.