Louisiana will turn to AI to detect Medicaid fraud, health officials say
On his first day on the job Monday, Louisiana Department of Health Secretary Bruce Greenstein announced the launch of two initiatives – one to target Medicaid fraud and another to reduce the number of overdose deaths during pregnancy.
The University of Louisiana at Lafayette is developing an artificial intelligence and data analysis tool the Louisiana Department of Health will use to fight 'fraud, waste and abuse,' state officials said. The university is developing the technology that could be deployed within a week to begin looking for instances of fraud in the Medicaid program, ULL Vice President for Research Ramesh Kolluru said in an interview.
'We are committed to improving government efficiencies in Louisiana using innovation,' Kolluru said. 'Our first mission … is to improve efficiency and integrity of the Louisiana Medicaid program.'
The state health department has created a 'Fighting Fraud, Waste and Abuse' task force to detect wrongdoing within Medicaid, Undersecretary Drew Maranto said. The agency will partner with LA DOGE, Louisiana Gov. Jeff Landry's version of Elon Musk's controversial Department of Government Efficiency. A Medicaid fraud control unit already exist
The AI technology is being trained on national data and peer-reviewed publications that have identified fraud, and it will then be tasked with finding similar patterns in Louisiana's Medicaid data, Kolluru said. Staff within the Louisiana Department of Health will verify any findings, he added.
Maranto said the department will also be working with the state Office of Motor Vehicles to check if any Medicaid recipients have active drivers licenses in other states, which could help them determine their eligibility to receive Medicaid benefits in Louisiana.
ULL's work on the AI program will not cost the health department because it already contracts with the university for other computing projects, Kolluru said.
ULL will also partner with the state Office of Technology Services to 'modernize Louisiana Medicaid systems,' Kolluru said.
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
In addition to detailing the counterfraud measures, Greenstein said the state has set a goal to reduce drug overdose deaths during pregnancy by 80% over the next three years.
Overdose deaths have been the leading cause of maternal mortality in Louisiana since 2018, LDH Deputy Secretary Dr. Pete Croughan said.
The new initiative, Project MOM (Maternal Overdose Mortality) will push to increase the availability of naloxone and buprenorphine, medications that can halt the effects of opioid overdoses when administered promptly. Other goals include more training health care providers on opioid use disorders and using money from settlements with opioid manufacturers to expand residential treatment facilities and outpatient clinics.
According to publicly available data, there were 28 overdoses during pregnancy in 2020, the most recent year data in available. LDH is setting a goal to reduce overdose pregnancy deaths in the state by 80% over three years, reducing the death rate to five or six people annually. The department expects to appoint a Project MOM director within 90 days.
Greenstein also announced the state would be moving away from having a single pharmacy benefit manager (PBM) for its Medicaid program. Such entities have been labeled as 'middlemen' that process prescription drug claims for the managed care organizations that provide Medicaid services, with critics saying they don't provide enough transparency to determine whether they provide any cost savings to patients.
Since October 2021, Louisiana has worked with Magellan Medicaid Administration as its sole prescription benefit manager. On Monday, Maranto said the department would work closely with its managed care organizations who run the state's Medicaid program and pharmacies to 'ensure the best approach to managing these benefits.'
The continued closures of chain and independent pharmacies threatens patient access to critical prescription drugs across Louisiana, Maranto added. The state's new approach will lean on the private contractors for Medicaid to handle prescription claims while also keeping drug prices in check.
SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
House tax-and-spending bill and other Trump administration changes could make millions of people lose their health insurance coverage
President Donald Trump has promised not to cut Medicaid many times over the past decade, including in the tax-and-spending legislative package he has made a top priority in his second administration. But several provisions in the bill, which the House of Representatives passed in a largely party-line 215-214 vote in May 2025, could cause millions of Americans enrolled in Medicaid to lose their health insurance coverage, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office. Medicaid is funded jointly by the federal government and the states. The program provides nearly 80 million Americans, most of whom are low-income or have disabilities, with health insurance. The legislation, which advances Trump's agenda, faces a tough battle in the Senate despite the Republican Party majority in that chamber. Several GOP senators have either said they oppose it or have expressed strong reservations for a variety of reasons, including the trillions of dollars the package would add to the U.S. government's debt. As a scholar who researches access to health care, I am concerned about the possibility that millions of people will lose their health insurance coverage should this bill become law. In many cases, that could occur due to new bureaucratic obstacles the bill would introduce. About 25.3 million Americans lacked insurance in 2023, down sharply from 46.5 million in 2010. Most of this 46% decline occurred because of the Affordable Care Act of 2010. The Congressional Budget Office, a nonpartisan agency that provides evidence-supported information to Congress, estimates that 10.9 million Americans would lose their health insurance by 2034 if the House of Representatives' version of that package were to become law. Of these, as many as 7.8 million would lose access to Medicaid. Another 2.1 million people who the CBO estimates would end up uninsured are Americans who today have coverage they bought in the marketplaces that the Affordable Care Act created. In addition to the measures in the tax-and-spending bill, other changes are looming. These include the expiration of some ACA-related measures adopted in 2021 that Trump does not intend to renew, and new regulations. All told, the number of Americans losing their health insurance by 2034 could total 16 million, according to the CBO. Other estimates suggest that the number of Americans losing their coverage could run even higher. The House bill would reduce incentives the federal government provides states to expand their Medicaid programs as part of the ACA. Eliminating these incentives would make it even less likely that Texas and the other nine states that still have not expanded Medicaid eligibility would do so in the future. The bill would also make it harder for states to come up with their share of Medicaid funding by limiting 'provider taxes.' These taxes are charged to hospitals, doctors and other medical providers. The revenue they raise help pay for the state's share of Medicaid costs. And the legislative package would also reduce federal funding to cover Medicaid costs in states that provide coverage to unauthorized immigrants using only their own funds. Threatened with billions in losses, the states that do this are unlikely to maintain these programs. In California alone, this would jeopardize the coverage of 1.6 million of its residents. Losing Medicaid coverage may leave millions of low-income Americans without insurance coverage, with no affordable alternatives for health care. Other proposed changes in the House bill would indirectly cut Medicaid coverage by forcing people to deal with more red tape to get or keep it. This would happen primarily through the introduction of 'work requirements' for Medicaid coverage. When enrolled in the program, applicants who are between 19 and 64 years old would need to certify they are working at least 80 hours a month or spending that much time engaged in comparable activities, such as community service. Work requirements specifically target people eligible for Medicaid through the Affordable Care Act's expansion of the program. They tend to have slightly higher incomes than the other people eligible for this benefit. Arkansas gave Medicaid work requirements a try during the first Trump administration. Researchers who studied what happened found that 1 in 4 of the Arkansans enrolled in Medicaid affected by the policy lost their health insurance coverage. They also found that in most cases, this occurred because of bureaucratic obstacles, and that the policy didn't lead to more people getting jobs. By some estimates, the work requirements provision alone would lead to close to 5 million people of the 7.8 million being denied Medicaid coverage. At the same time, the bill would increase how often Medicaid beneficiaries have to reapply to the program to keep their coverage from once every 12 months to twice a year. It also would delay or reverse several policies that made it easier for Americans to enroll in Medicaid and maintain their coverage. Many of those who aren't kicked out would also face either new or higher co-payments for appointments and procedures – restricting their access to health care, even if they don't wind up without insurance. There is ample evidence that obstacles like these make it hard to remain enrolled in safety net programs. Historically, the people who are most likely to lose their benefits are low-income, people of color or immigrants who do not speak English well. The bill would also affect the more than 24 million Americans who get health insurance through Affordable Care Act Marketplace plans. Changes in the House version of the bill would make it harder to get this coverage. This includes reducing the time Americans have to enroll in plans and eliminating certain subsidies. It also makes the enrollment process more complicated. Combined with other changes the Trump administration has made, experts expect Marketplace premiums to skyrocket. The Congressional Budget Office expects more than 2 million beneficiaries to lose coverage due to these new policies. Americans buying their own insurance on the ACA marketplaces may also face higher premiums. Increased subsidies in place since 2021 are set to expire at the end of the year. Combined with Trump regulatory decisions, this may lead to more than 5 million Americans losing coverage – whether or not the GOP's tax-and-spending package is enacted. The effects of the bill would also be compounded by further changes by individual states. This could include the introduction of monthly premiums that people with Medicaid coverage would have to pay, in Indiana and other states. Some states may also reduce eligibility for certain groups or cover fewer services, as states seek to reduce their Medicaid costs. And some states, including Iowa and Utah, are already pursuing work requirements on their own whether or not they become mandatory across the nation. If fewer Americans have health insurance due to changes the Trump administration is making and the policies embedded in the pending tax-and-spending legislative package, the health of millions of people could get worse due to forgone care. And at the same time, their medical debts could grow larger. This article is republished from The Conversation, a nonprofit, independent news organization bringing you facts and trustworthy analysis to help you make sense of our complex world. It was written by: Simon F. Haeder, Texas A&M University Read more: US health care is rife with high costs and deep inequities, and that's no accident – a public health historian explains how the system was shaped to serve profit and politicians There's no evidence work requirements for Medicaid recipients will boost employment, but they are a key piece of Republican spending bill Work requirements are better at blocking benefits for low-income people than they are at helping those folks find jobs Dr. Simon F. Haeder has previously received funding from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, the Pennsylvania Insurance Department, and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation for unrelated projects.
Forbes
2 hours ago
- Forbes
The Digital Revolution: Unlocking The Power Of Data In Life Sciences
Rajnish Nath, President of Manufacturing, Automotive, Aerospace & Defense, and Life Sciences at Capgemini Americas. The future of healthcare is here—and it's digital. From accelerating research to improving patient care, the integration of AI, data analytics and cutting-edge technologies is driving the industry into a new era where disruption is the norm. However, while digital transformation has the potential to unlock unprecedented value, it's not simply a matter of upgrading technology. It requires a fundamental shift in mindset, with a strong focus on establishing a solid data foundation to drive meaningful progress in a world that is increasingly driven by automation, prediction, and personalization. Data is the cornerstone of today's digital landscape, as it fuels these AI-enabled technologies to learn, adapt and deliver reliable results. As AI becomes more sophisticated, its effectiveness depends entirely on the quality and integrity of the data it's built on. Without strong data, even the most well-designed strategies and initiatives are built on unstable ground. Throughout my 28-year tenure with Capgemini, I've served clients across all sectors and functions. A solid foundation of good data is particularly relevant in the life sciences industry, where advanced technology is bringing us into a new era of R&D and patient care. Our ability to understand how we leverage the power of data has never been more critical to achieving life-changing impact. The life sciences industry generates vast amounts of data, but collecting it alone isn't enough. The real value lies in transforming raw data into actionable insights that drive improvements across the entire value chain—from enhancing patient outcomes to streamlining business operations. Yet, only 37% of life sciences organizations have standardized frameworks and tools in place to effectively collect, analyze and manage the full spectrum of data, including patient records, real-world outcomes and clinical trial results. As the role of data in driving innovation becomes more apparent, many organizations are turning to strategic partnerships to streamline data management and deliver measurable business results. This shift comes at a time when the global life sciences analytics market is projected to nearly double—from $13.78 billion in 2025 to $27.75 billion in 2032—reflecting the growing demand for data-driven solutions. And while life sciences leads the charge, the value of quality data management is gaining importance across all industries, becoming the basis of digital transformation and a key factor in maintaining competitive advantage. Partnerships that bring together functional innovation and precise data integration have the power to be truly transformative. This combination lays the groundwork for scalable, future-ready solutions designed to meet the evolving demands of a digital-first world. After all, it's a saying we know well: Not all data is good data. In an age where information is everywhere, success depends not just on access but on the quality, accuracy and usability of the data at hand. At this stage of mainstream digital transformation, quality data and advanced technologies like AI, machine learning and robotics are deeply interconnected—you simply can't have one without the other. The push to integrate advanced technologies, particularly within software-driven solutions, is motivated by the need to improve R&D efficiency, enhance market intelligence, streamline operations and deliver more personalized, effective patient care. Despite the momentum, and with the global AI market in life sciences projected to reach $14.20 billion by 2034, many organizations still face considerable hurdles. Challenges related to strategy, governance, funding, talent, technology integration, data management and regulatory compliance often slow or complicate progress. In particular, the growing reliance on big data in drug discovery, development and clinical trials is forcing companies to reevaluate their capabilities. Because of these challenges and the growing importance of data management and advanced technologies, here are several best practices that organizations can implement to successfully navigate this evolving landscape. • Data-First Approach: Start AI initiatives by focusing on data quality and readiness to prevent cost overruns and delays and ensure AI readiness. Prioritizing data aligns transformation with business goals. • Leverage Expertise: Utilize proven expertise and methodologies to handle complex data challenges. This includes employing a repeatable data migration approach that minimizes the risk of unsuccessful implementations and ensures high-quality data that aligns with business goals. • Service Excellence: Engage in long-term guidance and services that extend beyond a project's onset. This includes consulting expertise, oversight, on-demand support and deep technical expertise to drive real business value continuously. • Data Competency: Build the practice around the solutions to ensure the data initiatives are aligned with business goals, deliver measurable ROI and meet key performance indicators. • Customer-Centric Focus: Prioritize the client's end-customer success by delivering exceptional value and aligning data outcomes with business outcomes. This approach minimizes risks and drives higher-value outcomes. In today's increasingly digital landscape, validated processes are no longer optional—they're essential in a highly regulated environment where certified systems ensure compliance and data integrity. Regulations such as medical device reporting (MDR) in the EU and unique device identification (UDI) in the U.S. have intensified the demand for accurate data collection and reporting, particularly as they relate to patient safety. At the same time, technological advancements are pushing organizations to continuously evolve their data models and adopt new systems to stay competitive. True effectiveness now lies in bridging regulatory compliance with business acumen, empowering organizations to make informed, scalable decisions backed by reliable data. Looking ahead, data management practices must become more intentional. Where companies once stored every piece of data indefinitely, there's now a clear need to purge outdated or irrelevant information. Retaining only business-critical data helps minimize risk, enhance accuracy and build cleaner, more actionable datasets. As digital transformation continues to reshape the life sciences industry, the ability to leverage quality data alongside advanced technologies will be the key to success. Organizations that build solid data foundations and integrate AI and machine learning effectively can drive faster innovation and better patient outcomes. With the right strategic approach, the future of healthcare is one where data is the driving force behind breakthrough treatments and operational excellence. Forbes Technology Council is an invitation-only community for world-class CIOs, CTOs and technology executives. Do I qualify?
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
The FDA Wants AI To Speed Up Health Care Decisions — Here's Why Experts Are Concerned
Read on Donald Trump and Robert F. Kennedy's war on health care in the U.S. Earlier this week, Dr. Marty Makary, the commissioner of the U.S. Food and Drug Association and Dr. Vinay Prasad, the director of the Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, published an article in the Journal of the American Medical Association about the FDA's plans to use artificial intelligence to accelerate decision-making in a realm of health-related fields. Exactly what AI use at the FDA will look like is still to be determined, but the article stated that AI could be used to: accelerate the approval of drugs and devices reduce animal testing address 'concerning' ingredients in food. Many people within the health and science world (and beyond) are concerned by this move, including Elisabeth Marnik, a scientist and science communicator based in Maine, who is particularly worried about the shift to AI after fake citations made their way into a Make America Healthy Again report just a few weeks ago, likely due to unsystematic AI use. There are other concerns, too. 'The FDA's move to explore AI for accelerating drug and device approvals and for food ingredient oversight marks a critical inflection point in regulatory innovation, but it also introduces a series of legal, ethical and structural tensions that can't be glossed over,' Stacey B. Lee, a professor of law and ethics at Johns Hopkins Carey Business School and Bloomberg School of Public Health, told HuffPost via email. The Department of Health and Human Services didn't immediately respond to HuffPost's request for comment. Below, experts share more thoughts on the FDA's AI implementation. 'It's a bit disorienting because it feels like they are doing the thing that they are also criticizing in that they're on this big agenda of almost re-litigating all processes established by our public health agencies to ensure 'safety and efficacy' and yet they're also wanting to expedite things,' said Jessica Malaty Rivera, an infectious disease epidemiologist. Moving quickly through processes while guaranteeing 'safety and efficacy' generally don't go hand-in-hand. 'That feels like you can't have both things at the same time,' she added. Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has said he wants to put many vaccines through longer trials, and while the FDA's AI use hasn't been pegged for vaccine trials, 'they are still saying that they want to shorten review times and speed up the delivery of treatments to people who need them,' Malaty Rivera said. Kennedy also repeatedly promises 'radical transparency' in health care, yet AI threatens that transparency, experts say. 'I haven't been able to find great, transparent information about exactly where and how they're using AI. They talk about using it for review, but in what way?' said Marnik. 'The law doesn't prohibit innovation, but it does demand accountability,' said Lee. 'Any AI implementation must be subject to clear statutory authority, rigorous oversight and published methodologies to preserve public trust,' she added. This goes back to transparency. 'The core concern is opacity. AI tools, especially proprietary or black-box models, can obscure how decisions are made. If a drug is greenlit or a food ingredient is flagged based on an algorithm that the public can't scrutinize, it erodes due process and patient safety,' Lee said. 'This move also raises critical structural questions: If an AI system contributes to a faulty approval or missed red flag, who's accountable? The software developer? The FDA staffer who relied on the tool?' There is currently a large liability gap, she noted — 'and the regulatory framework hasn't caught up.' When it comes to using AI to look at the 'concerning' ingredients in food in the U.S., Malaty Rivera has concerns. 'MAHA and Marty Makary, in particular, continue to spread misinformation about the safety of food,' she said. 'They continue to malign things that are not harmful to people, like seed oils, they continue to misrepresent even the ingredients of baby formula.' Many of the words used to vilify certain foods and certain ingredients are wellness marketing gimmicks, 'things like non-GMO and organic and pushing things like beef tallow and raw milk,' she added. She also voiced concerns about the data and language that could be used to inform the AI systems when it comes to food regulations. 'I don't trust the people that are in charge of these decisions to make evidence-based decisions on food ingredients. I really don't,' she said. 'We also need to consider bias in training data. If the AI is trained on historically biased data — say, clinical trials that underrepresent women or communities of color, we risk automating disparities in approvals or warnings,' Lee said. Research shows that AI itself is biased and even is known to prop up racist stereotypes. More, how would AI handle the so-called 'DEI-related' words that are currently banned from science research by the Trump administration? 'I don't even know if, because of all these banned words, if applications that even have words that have been considered banned would even pass through these AI models designed by people creating the word bans,' added Malaty Rivera, who added that she wants to know how equity and unbiased review will be ensured in the AI process. 'I would love to see the methodology. I would love to see the ways in which it's not going to cause further harm,' she said. Many people are leery of AI, and for good reason. It's taking jobs, has plagiarism issues, is linked to privacy concerns and, as mentioned above, it's known to be biased. But, when used properly, there are pros to AI both at the FDA and in everyday life. 'In food regulation, especially, this could be a breakthrough. AI can scan molecular structures and evaluate safety profiles at a scale no human team could match,' said Lee. 'But the system has to be designed to prioritize health, not convenience,' 'I do think eventually AI will be a useful tool in helping streamline things and potentially even helping analyze big data sets,' Marnik said, 'but I think that there's a lot of steps we have to go through to make sure that's actually happening correctly before it's used on such a federal level. Malaty Rivera noted that AI isn't going anywhere and while it could be useful to review thousands of pages of information, it would be a mistake to completely remove humans from the process. No matter what AI is used for at the FDA, processes must be in place to ensure fairness and accuracy, experts say. 'If this is going to be what you want to eventually use, there should be essentially a scientific process to establish that the system is actually working as well as you think it's working and is actually working as well as a human review process,' Marnik said, adding that without systems (and people) to make sure AI is functioning properly, there can be major issues. Lee noted informed decisions need to be reviewed, explained and equitable for patients, researchers and policy makers. 'AI in health care is not just a tech issue; it's a trust issue,' Lee said. Otherwise, more people could be led to distrust the medical system. And levels of distrust are already high, with roughly two-thirds of Americans expressing a lack of faith in the medical establishment. 'The FDA's AI pilot comes at a moment when public trust in health institutions is already fragile. Getting this right means building the right guardrails now, not after the first high-profile failure,' Lee said. 'That includes independent audits, transparent reporting, human oversight and clear legal responsibility.' Malaty Rivera said if she believed in the scientific rigor and integrity of the people at the helm of the FDA, the use of AI in health and science would be one thing. 'But I don't. And so I don't trust these decision makers to be designing and/or navigating these tools,' she said. Malaty Rivera also added that the people appointed under the MAHA regime have an agenda that isn't evidence-based science. 'The agenda is this alternative, contrarian version of health and wellness that is often spreading a lot of harmful misinformation,' she said. Marnik added that she doesn't think AI is currently able to do rigorous scientific reviews or find limitations associated with scientific data, which is crucial for the FDA when it comes to medical approvals. 'AI is only as good as the prompts and the directions that you give it, and what it's been trained on,' Marnik said. 'So, ultimately, I think this is too soon, and I would like to know more about exactly how they plan to use it.' RFK Jr. Went Swimming In Sewage Water — Health Experts Beg You Not To Do That. If RFK Jr. Actually Gave An F About Health, Here's What He'd Focus On Instead RFK Jr.'s Stunning Claim About Black People And Vaccines Sparks Concern From Medical Experts
