Page 26

www.rsisinternaonal.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,

MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)

ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue V, May 2026

Revenue Leakages in TPA Insurance Claims and Corporate Claims:

An Institutional Overview of Aster Prime Hospital, Hyderabad

Arnab Chowdhury

, Prof. (Dr.) Babita Das Paul

Student, BBA in Hospital Management, Dept. of Hospital Management NSHM Business School NSHM

Knowledge Campus Durgapur

Professor Dept. of Hospital Management NSHM Business School NSHM Knowledge Campus

Durgapur

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.51583/IJLTEMAS.2026.150500003

Received: 30 April 2026; Accepted: 04 May 2026; Published: 22 May 2026

ABSTRACT

In the contemporary healthcare landscape, efficient revenue cycle management has emerged as a critical

determinant of institutional sustainability, particularly in hospitals dependent on Third Party Administrator (TPA)

and corporate insurance claims. This paper presents an institutional overview of revenue leakages within such

claim processes at Aster Prime Hospital, Hyderabad. Functioning under the aegis of Aster DM Healthcare, the

hospital represents a well-established multi-specialty healthcare provider with advanced clinical and diagnostic

capabilities. While clinical excellence remains a core strength, the complexity of insurance-based reimbursement

systems introduces multiple administrative challenges. This study contextualizes the operational environment,

focusing on the structural and procedural dimensions of TPA and corporate claims management. It aims to lay

the groundwork for subsequent analytical exploration by outlining institutional characteristics, service scope,

and the relevance of streamlined claim processing mechanisms in minimizing potential revenue inefficiencies.

Keywords: Revenue Cycle Management, TPA Insurance, Corporate Claims, Healthcare Finance, Hospital

Administration, Insurance Billing Systems

INTRODUCTION

The transformation of healthcare financing from out-of-pocket expenditure to insurance-based systems has

significantly altered hospital revenue structures. In this evolving scenario, TPA and corporate claims constitute

a substantial share of hospital income. However, the multi-layered nature of these claims—requiring

coordination among healthcare providers, insurers, and intermediaries—makes the revenue cycle vulnerable to

inefficiencies. Revenue leakages, defined as the loss of potential income due to procedural gaps or administrative

lapses, have thus become an area of growing concern in hospital management.

Organizational Overview

Aster Prime Hospital is a multi-specialty healthcare facility with a structured layout across different floors,

integrating clinical, diagnostic, and administrative services. Key departments include radiology, billing, financial

counselling, inpatient services, and advanced diagnostics such as ECG, MRI, and CT scan. Specialized units like

MICU, NICU, CICU, operation theatres, dialysis, and wards are distributed floor-wise for efficient patient

management. Administrative functions such as HR, audit, laboratory, and medical records ensure smooth

operations.

Functional and Clinical Services

The hospital operates through medical departments (OPD, IPD, casualty, pharmacy, diagnostics, and specialty

care) and non-medical departments (HR, IT, billing, housekeeping, and administration). A team of specialized

Page 27

www.rsisinternaonal.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,

MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)

ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue V, May 2026

doctors across disciplines supports quality healthcare delivery. Emergency management is guided by a color-

coded system ensuring quick and coordinated responses.

Revenue Leakage in Healthcare

Revenue leakage refers to the loss of potential income due to inefficiencies in billing, documentation, and claims

management, especially in TPA and corporate claims. The involvement of intermediaries and complex insurance

structures increases the chances of delays, miscommunication, and claim denials. Addressing revenue leakage is

essential for financial stability, operational efficiency, and improved patient care. It helps in ensuring timely

reimbursements, reducing administrative errors, maintaining compliance, and enhancing patient satisfaction.

Revenue leakage significantly impacts hospital performance. Effective management through improved

processes, training, and data-driven strategies is necessary to enhance financial sustainability and healthcare

quality.

Key Components of Revenue Leakage

Major causes include inaccurate coding and billing, improper documentation, and high claim denials. Delayed

submissions, unresolved or underpaid claims, and lack of follow-up further increase losses. Complex insurance

procedures and failure to verify patient eligibility or obtain pre-authorizations also contribute significantly.

Additionally, challenges in collecting patient payments and issues in contracts or outdated systems weaken

revenue realization.

Key Challenges

Hospitals face difficulties such as manual and error-prone processes, delayed claim submissions, increasing

denial rates, and lack of automated audits. Fragmented information systems, limited resources, and ineffective

follow-up reduce the ability to recover dues efficiently.

Industry Practices

Corporate insurance involves complex contracts, strict pre-authorization, bulk billing, and audits, often leading

to delayed or reduced payments. Health insurance practices include claim adjudication, denial management, and

use of Hospital Information Management Systems (HIMS). Weaknesses in these areas contribute to revenue

leakage.

Causes of Revenue Leakages

Pre-Billing / Documentation-Related Causes

Missing policy details, incorrect TPA desk assignment Incomplete or Inaccurate Patient Information at

Registration

, or outdated corporate employee data lead to claim rejections at the source.

Example: Patient registered under wrong insurer panel → automatic denial.

Inadequate Clinical Documentation

Physicians fail to document medical necessity, procedure details, or co-morbidities required by TPA/corporate

medical reviewers.

Results in down-coding or full denial during pre-authorization or final audit.

Page 28

www.rsisinternaonal.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,

MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)

ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue V, May 2026

Delay in Obtaining Pre-Authorizations (TPA-Specific)

Procedures performed without prior approval due to emergency admissions or internal communication gaps.

TPAs routinely deny non-authorized high-value claims (e.g., implants, ICU stays).

Mismatch Between Authorized and Actual Services

Variation in consumables, pharmacy, or room category not updated in real-time with TPA desk → partial

reimbursement.

Coding & Billing Errors

Incorrect or Outdated Coding (ICD, CPT, HCPCS)

Use of unspecified codes, unbundling violations, or failure to apply TPA-specific modifiers.

Corporate Claim Issue: Employers reject codes not aligned with their customized benefit schedules.

Under-Coding Due to Conservative Billing Practices

Fear of audit leads to deliberate under-billing of justifiable add-ons (e.g., physician consultation fees, monitoring

charges).

Missed Charge Capture

Services like nursing procedures, physiotherapy, or dietary consultations not entered into the HIS (Hospital

Information System).

Common in corporate claims where itemized billing is mandatory.

Duplicate or Overlapping Billing

Same service billed under multiple heads (e.g., OT consumables + surgical package) → flagged and deducted

during TPA scrutiny.

TPA & Payer Workflow-Specific Causes

Delay in Claim Submission Beyond SLA Timelines

TPA contracts mandate 30–45 days for submission; internal delays (discharge summary pending, file closure)

trigger auto-denials.

Poor Coordination with On-Site TPA Desk

Lack of daily reconciliation between hospital bills and TPA acknowledgments → unbilled enhancements or

rejected add-ons.

Inadequate Response to Query Letters / RA (Remittance Advice)

Hospitals fail to submit clarifications within 7–15 days → permanent deduction.

Package Violations and Arbitrary Deductions

TPAs apply standardized surgical packages and deduct “non- payable” items (e.g., registration fees, visitor

meals) without transparency.4.3 Research Gap of the Study

Page 29

www.rsisinternaonal.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,

MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)

ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue V, May 2026

Corporate Claims-Specific Causes

Lack of Customized Tariff Agreements

Absence of MoU-defined rates for implants, room rents, or professional fees → billed at rack rate, reimbursed

at discounted corporate rate → leakage.

Employee Eligibility Verification Gaps

Treatment provided to ineligible dependents or ex-employees due to outdated HR lists.

Non-Adherence to Corporate Policy Exclusions

Billing for cosmetic, experimental, or wellness procedures excluded in corporate health plans.

Delayed or Missing Employer Approvals

High-cost treatments require corporate pre-approval; delays result in patient self-payment or write-offs.

Systemic & Technology-Related Causes

Fragmented IT Systems (HIS, TPA Portal, Billing Module)

Data silos prevent end-to-end visibility → missed charges or erroneous transmissions.

Lack of Automated Claim Scrubbing

Manual processes fail to catch NCCI edits, payer-specific rules, or TPA bundle logic before submission.

Inadequate Denial Management Workflow

Denied claims not tracked, appealed, or analysed → recurring leakage from same root causes.

Staff Turnover and Training Gaps

Billing/coding teams lack updated knowledge of TPA policy changes or corporate addendums.

Impacts of Revenue Leakages

Financial Impacts

Direct Revenue Loss

 TPA claims: Deductions of 5–15% per claim due to tariff violations, non-payable items, or documentation

gaps; outright denials can reach 20–30% of billed amount.

 Corporate claims: Short-payments, delayed settlements, and write-offs due to disputed invoices result in

10–25% loss on aging receivables.

 Annual impact: Hospitals handling 40–60% of revenue via TPA/corporate channels may lose 2–10% of

total annual revenue (₹5–50 crore for mid-to-large hospitals).

Cash Flow Disruption

 Prolonged realization cycles (60–120+ days) due to TPA queries and corporate reconciliations strain

working capital.

Page 30

www.rsisinternaonal.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,

MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)

ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue V, May 2026

 Increased dependency on high-interest loans to bridge operational gaps.

Rising Bad Debts and Write-Offs

 Unresolved claims escalate to bad debts, especially when corporates delay beyond 90 days or TPAs close

files post-query expiry.

 Forced write-offs during audits to maintain insurer/corporate relationships.

Operational Impacts

Increased Administrative Burden

 Dedicated teams spend 30–40% of time on query resolution, resubmissions, and reconciliations instead of

patient care coordination.

 Higher manpower costs for claim follow-ups and grievance redressal.

Resource Misallocation

 Funds meant for infrastructure, equipment upgrades, or staff salaries diverted to cover revenue shortfalls.

 Delayed vendor payments (pharmacy, implants, diagnostics) disrupt supply chains.

Inventory and Cost Control Challenges

 Leakage from unbilled consumables or reused implants forces cost absorption by the hospital.

 Inability to negotiate better vendor terms due to cash constraints.

Growth Impacts

Stunted Expansion Plans

 Reduced capital for new specialty units, technology adoption (e.g., robotic surgery), or satellite clinics.

 Lower EBITDA margins deter investors and limit access to institutional funding.

Erosion of Negotiating Power

 TPAs and corporates leverage high denial/deduction rates to push for deeper discounts in renewals.

 Loss of preferred provider status in corporate wellness programs.

Delayed Digital Transformation

Inability to invest in RCM automation, AI-based coding tools, or integrated HIS-TPA platforms—perpetuating

manual errors.

Reputational and Relationship Impacts

Strained TPA and Corporate Relationships

 Frequent disputes over deductions and delays lead to contract non-renewals or reduced patient referrals.

 Exclusion from insurer networks due to poor claim approval ratios (<70–75%).

Page 31

www.rsisinternaonal.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,

MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)

ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue V, May 2026

Patient Dissatisfaction

 Patients face out-of-pocket expenses due to TPA denials (e.g., non-payable items), blaming the hospital.

 Negative feedback on cashless experience reduces loyalty and word-of-mouth referrals.

Internal Morale and Staff Turnover

 Billing teams face blame for revenue shortfalls, leading to burnout and attrition.

 Clinicians frustrated by revenue-driven documentation demands.

The analysis highlights that revenue leakage in hospitals primarily stems from gaps across pre-billing processes,

coding and billing accuracy, payer workflows, corporate claim procedures, and technological limitations. At the

pre-billing stage, incomplete patient information, inadequate clinical documentation, delays in pre-

authorizations, and mismatches between approved and actual services lead to early claim rejections. Coding-

related issues—such as outdated codes, under-coding, missed charge capture, and billing duplication—further

contribute to financial losses.

TPA and payer workflow shortcomings, including delayed submissions, poor coordination with TPA desks, slow

responses to query letters, and package-related deductions, add to the leakage. Corporate claims also face unique

challenges such as absence of customised tariffs, eligibility verification errors, policy exclusion violations, and

delayed employer approvals. Technology-related gaps—fragmented systems, lack of automated claim checks,

weak denial management, and insufficient staff training—create additional sources of recurring revenue loss.

The impact of these leakages is significant and multi-dimensional. Financially, hospitals face substantial revenue

loss ranging from 2–10% of annual turnover, along with cash flow disruptions, rising bad debts, and increased

write-offs. Operationally, claim rework increases administrative burden, misallocates resources, and disrupts

inventory management.

The growth of hospitals is hindered by reduced capital availability, weakened negotiating power with payers,

and slowed digital transformation. Reputationally, strained relationships with TPAs and corporates, patient

dissatisfaction due to denied cashless claims, and internal staff burnout further weaken the hospital’s standing

and performance.

Overall, unresolved revenue leakages undermine financial health, operational efficiency, stakeholder confidence,

and long-term growth potential, making focused interventions in RCM processes, technology, and training

essential.

Summary (Aster Prime Hospital, Hyderabad)

Key Sources of Leakage

At Aster Prime Hospital, revenue leakage is mainly observed in TPA and corporate claims due to operational

gaps. Major causes include incomplete patient registration details, inadequate clinical documentation, and delays

in pre-authorizations. Coding and billing issues such as incorrect codes, missed charge capture, and duplication

further reduce claim accuracy. Weak coordination with TPA desks and delays in responding to queries also lead

to deductions and denials.

Major Impacts

The hospital faces revenue losses, delayed cash inflows, and increased bad debts. Administrative workload rises

due to frequent claim rework and follow-ups. Limited funds affect infrastructure development and technology

adoption.

Page 32

www.rsisinternaonal.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,

MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)

ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue V, May 2026

Overall Insight

For Aster Prime Hospital, strengthening documentation, improving billing accuracy, enhancing TPA

coordination, and adopting integrated digital systems are essential to reduce leakage and improve financial

efficiency.

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY (WITH DATA REPRESENTATION)

Research Design and Scope

The study at Aster Prime Hospital adopts a descriptive and analytical approach to examine revenue leakage in

TPA and corporate claims. It maps the full claim cycle and identifies inefficiencies at each stage. The study

period covers 16 June–16 August 2025, where ~60% of hospital revenue comes from insured and corporate

patients.

Sampling and Data Collection

A purposive sample of 50 claims was selected:

 TPA: 25

 Corporate: 25

Additionally, 15 staff interviews were conducted. Data sources included billing records, audit reports, and TPA

logs. Tools used: document review, observation checklists, and Excel sheets.

Data Extraction Sheets

A structured template was used in Excel to record data on billed amount, approved amount, settled amount,

rejection type, and delay days.

Example Table 1:

Claim Type

TPA Insurance

Corporate

Total

Number of Claims

Total Claimed (INR)

20,80,000

18,95,000

39,75,000

Total Paid (INR)

18,78,000

15,05,000

33,83,000

Leakage Amount (INR)

2,02,000

3,90,000

5,92,000

Leakage %

9.7

20.5

21.2

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

Total amount Paid amount Leakage amount Leakage %

TPA Insurance Corporate

Page 33

www.rsisinternaonal.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,

MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)

ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue V, May 2026

TPA

Corporate

Leakage Amount

2,02,000

3,90,000

Analysis Techniques

 Descriptive statistics (leakage %, delays)

 Comparative analysis (TPA vs Corporate)

 Root cause analysis (coding errors, documentation gaps)

 Thematic analysis (staff feedback)

Formula used:

Leakage % = (Billed – Paid) / Billed × 100

Limitations and Insight

The study is limited to one hospital and varying TPA policies. However, it clearly shows that corporate claims

have higher leakage than TPA claims, highlighting the need for better documentation, coordination, and system

integration.

Data Analysis

 Descriptive Statistics: Calculation of mean deduction, percentage leakage, and delays in settlement.

 Comparative Analysis: Comparison of TPA versus corporate claim leakages department-wise.

 Trend Analysis: Visualization of monthly leakage patterns over the study period.

 Root Cause Analysis: Identification of underlying factors contributing to recurring issues, such as coding

errors, policy mismatches, and poor documentation.

 Qualitative Thematic Analysis: Coding of interview data into common themes related to workflow

inefficiencies, staff training gaps, and procedural constraints.

Formula = (Billed amount – Settled amount) / Billed amount x 100

Limitations

 Study findings are based on a single hospital and may not generalize across all institutions.

 Variations in TPA rules and corporate contract clauses constrained uniform analysis.

 Incomplete archival records limited access to older claim data.

The study adopts a descriptive and analytical research design to investigate the causes and extent of revenue

leakages in TPA and corporate claims at Aster Prime Hospital. The descriptive component examines how claims

are processed, approved, and settled, while the analytical component identifies inefficiencies and compliance

gaps across the claim cycle. The study focuses on mapping the end-to-end claims workflow, quantifying leakages

at each stage, and identifying operational and documentation issues contributing to financial loss.

The research was conducted over a two-month period (16 June 2025 to 16 August 2025) in a hospital where

nearly 60% of billing volume comes from TPA and corporate cases. Data was drawn from 50 purposively

Page 34

www.rsisinternaonal.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,

MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)

ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue V, May 2026

selected claim files—25 TPA and 25 Corporate—with additional insights gained from fifteen interviews with

staff in finance, billing, MRD, and insurance departments. Both primary and secondary data sources were used,

including interviews, observations, claim registers, audit reports, and communication logs.

Data collection tools included document reviews, observation checklists, semi-structured interviews, and

structured Excel templates designed to record key financial indicators such as billed amount, approved amount,

deductions, and settlement delays. Analytical methods involved descriptive statistics, comparative and trend

analysis, root cause analysis, and qualitative thematic categorization of staff feedback. The leakage percentage

was calculated using the formula:

(Billed Amount – Settled Amount) / Billed Amount × 100.

The study acknowledges limitations, including its focus on a single hospital, variations in TPA and corporate

policies that affected uniform analysis, and restricted availability of archival claim data. Despite these

constraints, the methodology provides a strong foundation for identifying systemic, operational, and contractual

factors contributing to revenue leakage.

RESULTS AND OBSERVATIONS

Data Analysis and Findings

The analysis shows that hospitals lose around 4–5% of their annual revenue due to claim denials, underpayments,

and billing inefficiencies. A significant contributor is the use of manual processes, where data entry errors alone

lead to nearly 4% revenue loss. Additionally, claim denials have increased and now account for approximately

15% of total submitted claims, affecting both TPA and corporate segments.

Revenue leakage was categorized into five key areas. Coding and billing errors arise from incorrect or

inconsistent use of medical codes, leading to underpayments or rejection of claims. Even small errors, such as

missed CPT adjustments, can reduce settlements by 2–3%. Improper or incomplete documentation is another

major issue, where missing discharge summaries, investigation reports, or authorization forms reduce

reimbursement rates. These problems are more frequent in manual systems.

Claim denials and delays occur due to incomplete patient information, lack of authorization, or late submission.

Delays exceeding 30 days increase accounts receivable and may lead to write-offs. Unbilled or lost claims also

contribute to leakage due to poor tracking and follow-up systems. Lastly, pricing and contract issues arise from

weak negotiation and unclear payer-provider agreements, particularly in corporate cases.

A comparative analysis of 50 patients highlights differences between TPA and corporate claims. TPA claims

show consistent losses due to strict scrutiny, coding errors, and frequent queries, resulting in higher denial rates

(18%) and longer settlement delays (14 days). In contrast, corporate claims have slightly lower denial rates

(13%) but higher average leakage (19%) due to unfavourable contract terms and internal approval delays.

Key observations indicate that coding errors and documentation gaps are the leading causes of leakage across

both claim types. TPA claims involve more audits and queries, increasing delays, while corporate claims suffer

from contract inefficiencies. Even a modest leakage of 12–16% per claim can result in significant financial loss,

especially in high-value cases.

Overall, the findings emphasize that improving billing accuracy, strengthening documentation practices, and

enhancing contract management are essential to reduce revenue leakage and improve hospital financial

performance.

Table: Leakage Sources (20 Patients)

Source

Amount (INR)

Improper Documentation

45,000

36%

Page 35

www.rsisinternaonal.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,

MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)

ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue V, May 2026

Under Review

30,000

24%

Denied Claims

20,000

16%

Unpaid Services

15,000

12%

Submission Issue

10,000

Delay Submission

5,000

Total

1,25,000

100%

Bar Graph

Leakage Sources (INR)

Improper Documentation | ██████████████████████████ 45,000

Under Review | █████████████████ 30,000

Denied Claims | ████████████ 20,000

Unpaid Services | █████████ 15,000

Submission Issue | ██████ 10,000

Delay Submission | ███ 5,000

(Percentage Representation)

Improper Documentation (36%) ████████████████

Under Review (24%) ██████████

Denied Claims (16%) ███████

Unpaid Services (12%) █████

Submission Issue (8%) ███

Delay Submission (4%) ██

Comparative Graph: TPA vs Corporate

Average Leakage:

TPA | ██████████ 10%

Corporate | ███████████████████ 19%

Denial Rate:

TPA | ██████████████ 18%

Corporate | ██████████ 13%

Delay (Days):

TPA | ██████████████ 14

Corporate | ███████ 7

Page 36

www.rsisinternaonal.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,

MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)

ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue V, May 2026

RECOMMENDATIONS & STRATEGIES

The analysis shows that revenue leakage in hospitals is primarily caused by documentation deficiencies, coding

inaccuracies, claim denials, and weak contract management practices. TPA claims are more prone to strict audits,

frequent queries, and longer settlement cycles, while corporate claims face higher leakage due to unfavourable

contract terms and internal approval delays. Dependence on manual processes further increases the chances of

errors, reducing overall revenue efficiency.

To minimize these issues, hospitals should adopt Integrated Hospital Management Systems (HIMS) along with

Electronic Medical Records (EMR) to ensure accuracy, transparency, and real-time data tracking. Strengthening

documentation and coding practices through regular training, standardized templates, and periodic audits can

significantly improve claim acceptance rates. Efficient Accounts Receivable (AR) and denial management

systems are essential to identify root causes, speed up resubmissions, and reduce financial losses.

Preventive strategies such as pre-authorization checks, eligibility verification, interim billing, and daily

reconciliation of services help control leakage at early stages. Additionally, continuous payer performance

monitoring and regular contract reviews enhance reimbursement efficiency.

Overall, an integrated approach combining technology adoption, process standardization, and continuous

monitoring is essential for reducing revenue leakage and improving hospital financial sustainability.

Recommendation Chart

Area

Policy Reference

Expected Benefits

HIMS / EMR Integration

HIMS Standards

Reduce manual errors

Documentation

Coding Audit Policy

Increase approval rates

Denial Management

RCM Policies

Minimize write-offs

Contract Management

Payer Contracts

Improve reimbursement accuracy

Staff Training

HR / Training Policies

Reduce process gaps

Revenue leakage in TPA insurance and corporate claims poses a serious challenge to hospital financial stability

and operational efficiency. Even small errors in registration, billing, coding, or documentation can accumulate

into significant losses over time. With already narrow profit margins, a loss of even a few percentage points can

limit a hospital’s ability to invest in technology, maintain staffing, and ensure quality patient care. The study

highlights that coding errors, incomplete documentation, delayed settlements, and poor contract management

are the primary causes of leakage, many of which are preventable through better systems and practices.

The findings further show that coding and billing errors alone can account for up to 4% revenue loss, especially

in hospitals dependent on manual processes. Rising claim denial rates, reaching nearly 15%, increase

administrative burden and reduce effective collections. While TPA claims face strict audits and delays, corporate

claims also experience leakage due to weak contract terms and slow internal approvals. Unbilled services,

inadequate follow-up, and growing accounts receivable further intensify financial strain.

To address these issues, hospitals must adopt technology-driven solutions like HMIS, standardize processes, and

strengthen staff training. Regular audits, proactive contract management, and efficient denial handling are

essential. Effective revenue cycle management not only improves financial performance but also supports better

resource allocation and enhanced patient care outcomes.

REFERENCES

1. Aruna, G. (2023). What Is Revenue Leakage in Healthcare & How to Reduce It? Retrieved from

https://ezovion.com/what-is-revenue-leakage-in-healthcare-how-to-reduce-it/

2. OA Editorial Team. (2025). Healthcare Revenue Leakages: How to Identify, Stop and Prevent. Retrieved

from https://cms.officeally.com/blog/healthcare-revenue-leakage-identify-stop-prevent

Page 37

www.rsisinternaonal.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,

MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)

ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue V, May 2026

3. Rex, H. (2025). Revenue Leakages in Healthcare: Sources, Impact and Fixes. Retrieved from

https://www.mdclarity.com/blog/revenue-leakage-in-healthcare

4. Pathstone Partners. (2024). Identifying Revenue Leakages in Healthcare. Retrieved from

https://pathstonepartners.com/news/identifying-revenue-leakage-in-healthcare/

5. Becker’s Hospital Review. (2023). Common Causes of Revenue Leakage in Hospitals. Retrieved from

https://www.beckershospitalreview.com

6. HFMA (Healthcare Financial Management Association). (2022). Best Practices in Revenue Cycle

Management. Retrieved from https://www.hfma.org

7. Deloitte. (2023). Improving Healthcare Revenue Cycle Performance. Retrieved from

https://www2.deloitte.com

8. McKinsey & Company. (2022). Optimizing Hospital Revenue Cycle Management. Retrieved from

https://www.mckinsey.com

9. World Health Organization (WHO). (2021). Health Financing and Revenue Management Systems.

Retrieved from https://www.who.int

10. KPMG. (2023). Healthcare Revenue Cycle Optimization Strategies. Retrieved from https://home.kpmg