How Much Does It Cost to Outsource Medical Billing?
- Medical Billing
- OneMed Billing
These two words get used interchangeably, and it is an expensive habit. A rejected claim was stopped at the gate — by the clearinghouse or the payer’s front-end edits — before anyone adjudicated it. There is no claim on file, no decision, and no appeal rights, because nothing was ever decided. A denied claim went through, was adjudicated, and was refused. Same frustration, completely different fix.
stopped before adjudication
adjudicated, then refused
This is the most common misrouting we see. A rejection sitting in a denial workflow cannot be appealed, because there is nothing to appeal — so it waits, while the filing window counts down from the date of service.
Same claim, same frustration — but the owner, the workflow, and the clock are all different.
Caught at the clearinghouse or the payer’s front-end edits
Returned after the payer has processed the claim
Why this matters operationally. When rejections get swept into a denial queue, they sit waiting for an appeal that can never be filed — and every day spent waiting comes out of a timely filing window that started at the date of service. Sorting the two correctly, on day one, is most of the work.
If a case genuinely belongs with appeals, we hand it there rather than holding it. See Denial Management and Appeal Management.
Rejections waste time and delay payment, and most of them were entirely preventable — the issue was sitting in the claim before it was sent, waiting for someone to look closely.
That is the whole job. Our team reviews each claim for errors, missing data, and payer-specific rules before it goes anywhere, then handles the ones that still come back. Reviewers read the claim in context rather than applying one fixed rule set to every line, which is what catches the problems a generic edit check waves through.
same day
The correction happens either way. Only the timing is your choice.
Every detail of the claim is checked against coding and payer requirements before it reaches the clearinghouse.
Codes and modifiers checked together against the documentation and the payer’s edits, since most rejections come from the combination rather than any single field.
Names, dates of birth, member IDs and coverage details verified, because these small mismatches are the single most common technical rejection.
Each payer has its own edits and format expectations. Claims are checked against the right rule set, not a generic one.
Authorization and referral numbers confirmed and correctly linked to the claim, so an approval you already hold isn't wasted.
Rendering and billing provider details, taxonomy codes and enrollment status verified — quiet fields that reject entire claims.
We plug into your pre-submission workflow directly, whether claims go out through your EHR or a clearinghouse — inside Athena, AdvancedMD, DrChrono, Kareo and others.
Your team works exactly as it does today. Nothing changes upstream of us.
Every claim line is read for coding accuracy and the data problems that trigger technical rejections.
The claim is checked against that payer’s current requirements rather than a single generic rule set.
Straightforward fixes are made. Anything needing your judgement comes back with a clear explanation, not just a flag.
The claim goes out clean, with the issues resolved before the clearinghouse ever sees it.
Every issue is logged so it can be reported as a trend, and the same error stops repeating.
one cause still rising — flagged for a workflow fix
Illustrative report view.
Correcting claims one at a time is useful. Knowing why the same error keeps appearing is what actually reduces your rejection rate.
| Metric | Before OneMed | After OneMed |
|---|---|---|
| Claims rejected at the clearinghouse | 8% | Less than 1.5% |
| Time from claim creation to submission | 2 to 3 days | Same day |
| Re-submissions per week | High | Low |
| Repeat rejection causes identified | Rarely tracked | Reported weekly |
“OneMed catches the issues we didn’t even realize were causing rejections. Our clean claim rate jumped within the first month.”— Revenue Cycle Supervisor, Internal Medicine Group
Representative results across onboarded practices. Actual outcomes vary by specialty, payer mix, and baseline.
Rule-based scrubbers are fast and consistent, and they only catch what someone thought to encode. Complex claims fail on context — which is why every claim line here is read before it goes out.
| Capability | In-house staff | Software only | OneMed Billing |
|---|---|---|---|
| Manual claim review | Limited by workload | No | Yes |
| Payer-specific rejection knowledge | Partial | Generic rules only | Yes |
| Same-day claim scrubbing | Sometimes | Varies | Yes |
| Reporting on recurring rejection causes | Basic | None | Detailed |
| Personalized feedback loop | No | No | Yes |
Send us a recent batch. We’ll show you what would have been flagged before submission — and how many of your current rejections are sitting in the wrong queue.
We'll reply within one business day to scope it with your team.
Yes. We offer full rejection handling and can coordinate with your denial team if needed.
Yes. We scrub professional and institutional claims (CMS-1500 and UB-04) across all specialties.
We work with most major platforms, including AdvancedMD, Kareo, Athena, eClinicalWorks, and more.
Claims are typically reviewed and returned within 24 hours — same-day turnaround is available for most practices.
Absolutely. We log every issue and provide trend reports to help your team avoid repeat problems.