Hospital Transparancy is needed , let Consumers DRIVEN HEALTHCARE COSTS DOWN:

Many Hospitals Charge More Than Twice What Medicare Pays for the Same Care

The gap between rates set for private insurers and employers vs. those by the federal government stirs the debate over a government-run health plan.

A new study shows that John Muir Health in Walnut Creek, Calif., was the most costly system in the nation. Private insurers pay its hospitals four times what Medicare reimburses for care.
Reed Abelson

By Reed Abelson

  • Sept. 18, 2020

Hospitals across the country are charging private insurance companies 2.5 times what they get from Medicare for the same care, according to a new RAND Corporation study of hospital prices released on Friday.

In a half-dozen of 49 states in the survey, including West Virginia and Florida, private insurers paid three or more times what Medicare did for overnight inpatient stays and outpatient care.

“The prices are so high, the prices are so unaffordable — it’s just a runaway train,” said Gloria Sachdev, the chief executive of the Employers’ Forum of Indiana, a coalition that worked with RAND on the study. This year’s report expanded on the research the nonprofit organization conducted in 2019 on hospital prices in 25 states.https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/admin/100000007346334.embedded.html?isHybrid=true

The study, which exposes the aggressive pricing by mega-hospital systems that have gained enormous market power through widespread consolidation, is sure to kick-start the debate over the U.S. health care system and the need to overhaul it.

While the pandemic caused losses for many hospitals, many of these big systems are sitting on large profit reserves, while also receiving some of the $175 billion in aid Congress allocated to make up for their costs and lost revenue.

Employers provide health insurance coverage for more than 153 million Americans. The companies and insurers in the study paid nearly $20 billion more than Medicare would have for the same care from 2016 through 2018, according to the RAND researchers.

The findings cast doubt on the ability of private employers and insurers to competitively purchase health care for workers and their families compared to the federal government, said Katherine Hempstead, a senior policy adviser at the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, which helped fund the study. “You have this widening gap,” she said.

Proponents of a so-called public option seize on such price-gouging news to argue that creating a government health plan that could use its clout to demand lower prices would help bring down the cost of care.

“There’s a lot of energy behind the public option, and this is clearly one of the reasons,” said Dan Mendelson, the founder of Avalere Health, a Washington, D.C., consulting firm.

Employers say the proof of how much more they pay underscores the need for change. “The report lays out in stark terms what the employers have been dealing with for years,” said Elizabeth Mitchell, the chief executive of the Pacific Business Group on Health, a San Francisco group that represents employers and companies in the region. “If we want to keep a private market in U.S. health care, it has to function,” she said. “It’s really not functioning.”

A public option, distinct from the more controversial “Medicare for all” proposals that would do away with private insurance, has been embraced by Joseph R. Biden Jr., the Democratic presidential nominee. Democrats and even some Republicans seem open to the idea, according to a recent poll from the Kaiser Family Foundation.

Hospitals warn that they might not be able to function if they were paid Medicare rates. “There is certainly a cost shift, because the government knowingly underpays,” said Tom Nickels, an executive vice president for the American Hospital Association, a trade group. He warned that hospitals would lose billions of dollars in revenue. Some could be shuttered if forced to operate at lower Medicare payments.

“We cannot survive in that kind of the world,” he said, adding that many hospitals are struggling financially because of the pandemic. “To suggest cutting hospitals during a pandemic is outrageous.”

The report, which has data from the District of Columbia and every state but Maryland (because that state sets hospital rates), provides a sweeping view into the wide variation of prices paid by private insurers, which pay multiples of what Medicare does for a hospital stay or an M.R.I. “The magnitudes are quite eye-catching,” said Michael R. Richards, a health economist at Baylor University who reviewed the study.

The most costly hospital system in the nation from 2016 through 2018, according to the researchers, was John Muir Health in Walnut Creek, Calif., near San Francisco. Private insurers pay its hospitals four times what Medicare reimburses for care.

“We believe our private insurance payments are appropriate for the quality of care we provide in the market we serve,” the system said in a statement, noting that its loses money on Medicare patients.

In Indiana, Parkview Health, based in Fort Wayne, also remained one of the most expensive, charging private insurers in 2018 three times what Medicare paid for an overnight hospital stay and more than four times the Medicare rate for outpatient care. Employers pressured Anthem, the state’s largest insurer, to force Parkview to lower prices by threatening to drop it from the plan’s network.

The RAND data “predates Parkview’s new agreements with several major insurance companies and direct-to-employer partnerships,” as well as significant prices reductions for outpatient care, said Parkview’s chief executive, Mike Packnett, in a statement.

The RAND report also documents a wide variation in prices within the same hospital system. Mass General Brigham, formerly Partners Healthcare, was the most expensive system in Massachusetts, but Massachusetts General, one of its premier hospitals, charged private insurers nearly three times what Medicare paid in 2016 through 2018, compared to roughly two times for the system’s Newton-Wellesley Hospital, according to the study.

Variation in payments is the result of differences in the type and complexity of services offered, said a spokesman for the system, as well as its research and teaching responsibilities.

Well-known and well-respected hospitals like Mass General “are the hospitals within the system that are likely to get the highest prices,” said Christopher M. Whaley, one of the RAND authors.

In some markets, the lack of an alternative means employers have no room to negotiate, said Suzanne Delbanco, the executive director of Catalyst for Payment Reform, a nonprofit that works with businesses to develop new ways of paying for medical care. “In a market that is highly consolidated with no choices, it can be logistically infeasible,” she said.

The pandemic could make things worse as big hospitals scoop up struggling physician practices or their smaller competitors. In West Virginia, Mountain Health Network is made up of the 2018 merger of two hospitals, after Cabell Huntington acquired its competitor over the objections of federal officials. Cabell was one of the nation’s most expensive systems from 2016 through 2018, according to the study. Mountain Health now reportedly has its eyes on a local physician group. The network said it could not comment on the findings.

Some hospitals argue they charge more because they deliver better care, and there does seem to be some association. “What we see is quality and the ability to charge high prices are intrinsically related,” said Craig Garthwaite, a health economist at the Kellogg School of Management at Northwestern University, who says some hospitals may be taking the extra money to invest in ways of improving quality.

Employers have had mixed success in pushing back against high-priced hospitals. Indiana employers succeeded in pressuring Anthem to take action, according to Ms. Sachdev. The insurer threatened to drop Parkview from its network, before reaching an agreement in July in which the hospital offered significant savings. Two state employees’ plans, in Montana and Oregon, have also been able to negotiate contracts that use Medicare prices as a benchmark for what they will pay, according to the RAND researchers.

But in other areas, the hospitals have been less willing to budge. In Colorado, employers have had productive discussions with some of the specialty hospitals and independent hospitals, said Robert J. Smith, the executive director of the Colorado Business Group on Health. “We’ve made very little progress with health systems,” he said.

Many employers, including some represented by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, oppose government action, but others are growing more open to the idea of some sort of government intervention, ranging from rate regulation to a public option. “They are increasingly seeing in some cases the need for regulatory intervention because the market is broken,” Ms. Mitchell said.

But the pandemic and the potential threat it poses for many hospitals could put off any discussion, even if the Democrats were to win the White House and the Senate. “The hospitals are the most effective, most sympathetic lobby there is,” said Dr. Robert Berenson, a policy analyst at the Urban Institute.

Democrats will also have to figure out how to design a plan that people find both affordable and comprehensive, in contrast to some of the mid-tier plans sold under the Affordable Care Act, said Rodney Whitlock, a former Republican Senate staffer who now works for McDermott+Consulting. “How can the Democrats create a public option that is not clearly better than private insurance?” he asked. “If they don’t, they will be tagged as failing.”Rising Hospital CostsWealthiest Hospitals Got Billions in Bailout for Struggling Health ProvidersMay 25, 2020How a Medicare Buy-In or Public Option Could Threaten ObamacareJuly 29, 2019Sutter Health’s Request to Delay $575 Million Settlement Is DeniedJuly 10, 2020Many Hospitals Charge Double or Even Triple What Medicare Would PayMay 9, 2019

Reed Abelson covers the business of health care, focusing on health insurance and how financial incentives affect the delivery of medical care. She has been a reporter for The Times since 1995. @ReedAbelson


Sign Up for NYT Parenting

Get evidence-based guidance, plus personal stories and tiny victories from other parents.Sign Up

More in Health

‘This Does Not Look Good for Children’: Fires Pose Risk to Young LungsC.D.C. Reverses Testing Guidelines for People Without Covid-19 SymptomsEmails Detail Effort to Silence C.D.C. and Question Its ScienceHow to Ship a Vaccine at –80°C, and Other Obstacles in the Covid FightCoronavirus May Increase Premature Births, Studies Suggest

Personal Care Accounts

 General Information on Personal Care Accounts 

Sen. Hatch’s 2011 Family & Retirement Health Investment Act – May 26, 2011 – Orrin Hatch Press Release

U.S. Senator Orrin Hatch (R-Utah), Ranking Member of the Senate Finance Committee, today unveiled the Family and Retirement Health Investment Act of 2011, bicameral legislation to strengthen and expand Health Savings Accounts (HSAs) and Flexible Spending Arrangements (FSAs) for American workers and retirees. Companion legislation was introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives by U.S. Rep. Erik Paulsen (R-Minn.). Specifically, the legislation will:

IRS Regulations on HSA, HRAs, & FSAs: Detailed descriptions and examples. 

Health Savings Accounts

2011 IRS HSA Notice:  Rev. Proc. 2010-22   SECTION 1. PURPOSE

This revenue procedure provides the 2011 inflation adjusted amounts for Health Savings Accounts (HSAs) as determined under § 223 of the Internal Revenue Code. The amounts for 2011 are unchanged from the amounts for 2010 because, after the application of the cost-of-living adjustment rules of § 223(g) (including the rounding rule of § 223(g)(2)), the changes in the Consumer Price Index for the relevant period do not result in changes to the amounts for 2011.

2011 HSA Plan Limits (BCBS):  2011 HSA Cost of Living Adjustments (COLA’s) Although the Treasury will not officially release the 2011 COLA-adjusted HSA minimum deductible, maximum out-of-pocket, and the single and family contribution amounts until June 1st it is possible to calculate anticipated amounts now that the March CPI has been released. Listed below is a brief description of the rules for calculating the COLAs followed by some illustrations for calculating the 2011 COLA-adjusted HSA minimum deductible, maximum out-of-pocket, and the single and family contribution amounts.

HSA Structure200920102011
Min Individual Deductible$1,150$1,200$1,200
Min Family Deductible$2,300$2,400$2,400
Max Individual OOP$5,800$5,950$5,950
Max Famil OOP$11,600$11,900$11,900
Max Individual Contribution$3,000$3,050$3,050
Max Family Contribution$5,950$6,150$6,150

HSA FAQ:  IRS Notice 2004-50 PURPOSE: This notice provides guidance on Health Savings Accounts.  Notice 2004-2, 2004-2 I.R.B. 269, provides certain basic information on HSAs in question and answer format.  This notice addresses additional questions relating to HSAs.

Health Reimbursement Arrangements

Original HRA IRS Announcement: Today, June 26, 2002 the Treasury Department and the Internal Revenue Service issued guidance that clarifies the tax treatment of health reimbursement arrangements (HRAs) in which the employee’s health benefit arrangement provides for employee-controlled reimbursement of medical costs. “With this new guidance, we clear the way for employers to adopt health plans with patient-directed features so that employees have more choice and greater control over their health care coverage,” stated Treasury Secretary Paul O’Neill.

HRA  Part I. Rev. Rul.  2002- 41 ISSUE:  Whether employer-provided coverage and medical care expense reimbursements made under a reimbursement arrangement that allows unused amounts to be carried forward, as described in Situations 1 and 2 below, are excludable from gross income under §§ 106 and 105 of the Internal Revenue Code, respectively.

HRA Part III.  Notice 2002-45  PURPOSE:  This notice provides basic information about a type of employer-provided health reimbursement arrangement (HRA) described below.  Published elsewhere in this bulletin is a revenue ruling providing guidance involving an HRA.

HRA IRS Ruling on HRA Income: Employees in an employer-provided Health Reimbursement Arrangement (HRA) where the employer reimburses workers for certain medical expenses don’t have to count the reimbursement as income.

HRA Wellness Ruling:  This document contains final rules governing the provisions prohibiting discrimination based on a health factor for group health plans and issuers of health insurance coverage offered in connection with a group health plan.

Flexible Spending Accounts

For information on the interaction between a health FSA and an HSA, see Other employee health plans under Qualifying for an HSA, earlier. What are the benefits of an FSA? You may enjoy several benefits from having an FSA.

 Contributions made by your employer can be excluded from your gross income.

 No employment or federal income taxes are deducted from the contributions.

 Withdrawals may be tax free if you pay qualified medical expenses. See Qualified medical expenses, later.

 You can withdraw funds from the account to pay qualified medical expenses even if you have not yet placed the funds in the account.

Health FSAs are employer-established benefit plans. These may be offered in conjunction with other employer-provided benefits as part of a cafeteria plan. Employers have complete flexibility to offer various combinations of benefits in designing their plan. You do not have to be covered under any other health care plan to participate.

Self-employed persons are not eligible for an FSA. Certain limitations may apply if you are a highly compensated participant or a key employee.

IRS Guidelines for Qualified Medical Expenses (QME):  Medical expenses are the costs of diagnosis, cure, mitigation, treatment, or prevention of disease, and the costs for treatments affecting any part or function of the body. They include the costs of equipment, supplies, and diagnostic devices needed for these purposes. They also include dental expenses.  Medical care expenses must be primarily to alleviate or prevent a physical or mental defect or illness. They do not include expenses that are merely beneficial to general health, such as vitamins or a vacation.

Medical expenses include the premiums you pay for Internal Revenue Service insurance that covers the expenses of medical care, and the amounts you pay for transportation to get medical care. Medical expenses also include amounts paid for qualified long-term care services and limited amounts paid for any qualified long-term care insurance contract.

Healthcare Consumerism

Employer Consumerism – General Healthcare

Healthcare Consumerism is about transforming a health benefit plan into one that puts economic purchasing power—and decision-making—in the hands of participants.  It’s about supplying the information and decision support tools they need, along with financial incentives, rewards, and other benefits that encourage personal involvement in altering health and healthcare purchasing behaviors.

Consumerism has two basic principles:

  1. Must work for the Sickest Members, as well as the healthy
  2. Must work for those not wanting to get involved in decision-making, as well as the “techies”

 Consumerism builds on basic mega-trends that are affecting many parts of society:

  1. Personal Responsibility
  2. Self-Help, Self-Care
  3. Individual Ownership
  4. Portability
  5. Transparency (the Right to Know)
  6. Consumerism (Empowerment)

Consumerism is transformational in that it changes the process of cost control in healthcare from the current managed care “supply control” system to a “demand control” system. 

The major theme for Healthcare Consumerism is the development of strategies to change behaviors.  Consumerism is NOT about high deductible plans, cost shifting, or even Health Savings Accounts.  Consumerism is about transforming a health plan from being a “benefit” to being an “accumulating asset.”  Consumerism is a new approach to health and healthcare that is a strategy NOT a plan design.

If Healthcare Consumerism is the core to creating a 21st Century Intelligent Health System, it must solve our most difficult issues.  That is, it must offer solutions to the expanding individual ownership of health insurance, addressing the number of uninisured, establishing Consumer-centric Medicaid, and Consumer-centric Medicare, as well as, addressing employer-based healthcare cost concerns. 

Consumers Health HUB

Facilitates in setting up Personalized healthcare through personal care accounts.

Consumer- Centric Medicare Expanding Benefits and Saving the System for Boomers and Beyond 
In the coming years, 78 million baby boomers will place unprecedented demands on Medicare.  Babyboomers have driven the economy for the past 50 years. Predictably, their influence and dominance will extend to the next sector of their seemingly insatiable consumption — health care.  Beware, the wave of Boomers will hit an already financially distressed Medicare program. The original Medicare plan, signed into law in 1965, did not include a prescription drug benefit. Congress added a limited drug benefit in 2004 as a part of the Medicare Modernization Act (MMA).  This new program feature initiates a prescription discount card benefit for all seniors.  The major features and cost of this program will become effective in 2006. The bill targets significant support for lower income Medicare enrollees, but while a major step in the right direction, the new Act will not solve the prescription drug concerns for most others.  For 40 years most boomers have had comprehensive medical coverage with prescription drugs and unlimited hospital coverage through their employer. Upon turning 65, boomers are likely to accept the antiquated and still limited Medicare program.  Choice and Responsibility Medicare must adapt to today’s consumers by incorporating two guiding principles: choice and personal responsibility. Without an injection of personal responsibility, Babyboomers could turn Medicare into a financial disaster. Unless properly structured with personal responsibility, babyboomers will have no idea of the cost of prescription drugs or any other medical care they consume. We can not give them a blank check. The government should supplement the current Medicare offering with a consumer-centric choice. Consumer-centric plans with personal care accounts (PCAs). PCAs would consist of health reimbursement accounts (HRAs) and health savings accounts (HSAs). This approach offers a new model of coverage that lets consumers, rather than government or HMOs, manage more of their health care decisions. Employers and pre-65 individuals have already embraced the June 2002 IRS announcement and guidelines that approved HRAs and the 2004 HSAs that were passed as a part of the MMA. HRAs and HSAs may be the most important changes to affect health care in 25 years. Under them, for the first time ever, health insurance can be offered with a combination of protection and savings. It time that Medicare include both these concepts in a Medicare PCA.

Empowered Patients Medicare could dramatically lower costs and improve quality of care by harnessing the power of patients as consumers.  Surveys show that within five years, 40% to 50% of employees will be covered under consumer-centric plan designs.  The evidence is clear, when patients control the dollars directly, they become wise purchasers.  Much of healthcare expenses are generated because patients are not compliant with accepted medical plans of care and treatment.  Consumer-centric Medicare would inject personal responsibility by rewarding desired activities and direct more funds to those willing to participate in their own improved outcomes.Paying for New Benefits from Savings With the savings from consumer-centric Medicare, we can provide all retires with  prescription drugs and cover other new medical services without additional taxes and without shifting funds from other government programs. PCAs would be available to cover health and healthcare costs that traditional Medicare does not cover.  For example, PCA funds could be used to pay for Medicare deductibles, copays, and coinsurance amounts.  They would be used to pay for qualified medical expenses not otherwise covered by Medicare. In addition, PCA funds would be used to purchase health care insurance, such as, long term care, cancer coverage, supplemental healthcare, or a prescription drug only policy.  Under current law, the component pieces of PCAs (HRAs and HSAs) have different rules for use and differ in how they are funded and vested.  These differences should be eliminated so that Medicare beneficiaries can use either account to meet their healthcare needs. For example, at retirement employer provided HRAs could be converted to HSAs.  Under this approach, all PCA funds would become HSA dollars. Any unused funds at death are passed on through estate probate. Building a Medicare Personal Care Account With consumer-centric Medicare, every beneficiary who chooses a this type of option, would have a personal care account (PCA) established in their name. The account could start with a zero balance and would be funded through a number of sources including employers offering post retirement healthcare supplements, tax deductible individual contributions, and Medicare deposits based upon voluntary patient participation in cost effective treatments and through compliance incentives programs. PCAs would be individual accounts under the control of the individual.  There would be many ways to increase the level of PCA funds: 
 1. Employers who provide for post retirement health care could contribute directly into the PCA. The employer’s contribution would be tax deductible as a business expense and received tax free by the retiree.  Additional employer funding could come from HRA/HSA funds that would be rolled over at retirement from an existing consumer-centric employer plan.

2. Medicare could establish incentive programs to reward compliance with “best practices” medical care and treatments.Voluntary disease management programs, would reward beneficiaries for compliance in following proven best practices of care. Increased compliance with PCA incentives would generate significant savings from fewer hospitalizations and re-hospitalizations.

3. Medicare could reward patients that with PCA incentives if they use hospitals with proven cost effective programs for the diagnosis being treated.  The Leapfrog Group, a consortium of employers, states that “patients who go to hospitals that frequently perform these high-risk treatments or procedures, or to hospitals that have demonstrated a good record for patient outcomes, have the best chance of surviving and successfully recovering.” For example, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) and several private companies have developed comparative statistics by hospital to show costs and quality (mortality and morbidity) that identify best practices and lower costs.  Using this type of data PCA incentive award programs would drive competition among hospitals based on leading edge improvements in health care.

 4.  Medicare beneficiaries that use hospitals with recognized quality standards would receive a PCA incentive bonus. The Leapfrog Group has produced several standards for recognizing higher quality hospitals.  For example, they have identified that hospitals with computer physician order entry (CPOE) for prescription drugs have fewer prescription errors and lower subsequent medication complications and deaths. Studies show a computerized prescription system can reduce serious medication mistakes by up to 86 percent. 

 5.  PCA incentives could be awarded to encourage using physicians with better outcomes.  A promising approach for consumer-centric plans reimburses physicians who provide recognized “value.” Research indicates high-volume surgeons tend to have better outcomes.  

6. Medicare beneficiaries could be allowed to contribute to their PCAs with tax deductible contributions. The amount of individual contribution could be limited to a multiple of the Medicare Part A deductible.   

7.  Medicare beneficiaries could be allowed to transfer (tax free) a certain amount of life insurance cash value directly into their PCA.  8.     PCAs would accumulate tax-free. As with current HSAs, investments would be through government approved financial investment vehicles.  To meet the demand for prescription drugs and other expansions of Medicare, this nation must replace the supply-control and price-control model of Medicare with a demand-control and patient-control model. One key to a workable demand-control system is the increase in personal responsibility and more individual control over healthcare expenditures. Consumer-centric Medicare and PCAs are the basis for that transformation.

Congressional Support If we are to have a financially viable Medicare program, this movement needs support from Congress and the Administration. Consumer-centric Medicare care offers a new direction of thinking about how to finance prescription drugs and other benefits needs of the elderly. There is no silver bullet. The problems of Medicare are huge and intimidating. Boomers and generations beyond will demand a new model of Medicare that reflects their needs. The time is right for more Medicare reform, these ideas can move an outdated plan design into the 21st Century. Ronald E. Bachman FSA, MAAA is a Senior Fellow of the Center for Health Transformation 

Bypass Surgery Cost

Price Variations is amazing .

Insurance companies should incentivise the consumers to shop for a better pricing any where ?

I can have this procedure done under $15,000 in a top notch center.