Posts Tagged Price

Analysis: Pulling Back Curtain on Hospital Prices Adds New Wrinkle in Cost Control

Analysis: Pulling Back Curtain on Hospital Prices Adds New Wrinkle in Cost Control

As President Donald Trump was fighting with Congress over the shutdown and funding for a border wall, his administration implemented a new rule that could be a game changer for health care.

Starting this month, hospitals must publicly reveal the contents of their master price lists — called “chargemasters” — online. These are the prices that most patients never notice because their insurers negotiate them down or they appear buried as line items on hospital bills. What has long been shrouded in darkness is now being thrown into the light.

For the moment, these lists won’t seem very useful to the average patient — and they have been criticized for that reason. They are often hundreds of pages long, filled with medical codes and abbreviations. Each document is an overwhelming compendium listing a rack rate for every little item a hospital dispenses and every service it performs: a blood test for anemia. The price of lying in the operating suite and recovery room (billed in 15-minute intervals). The scalpel. The drill bit. The bag of IV salt water. The Tylenol pill. No item is too small to be barcoded and charged.

But don’t dismiss the lists as useless. Think of them as raw material to be mined for billing transparency and patient rights. For years, these prices have been a tightly guarded industrial secret. When advocates have tried to wrest them free, hospitals have argued that they are proprietary information. And, hospitals claim, these rates are irrelevant, since — after insurers whittle them down — no one actually pays them.

Of course, the argument is false, and our wallets know it.

First of all, hospitals routinely go after patients without insurance or whose insurer is not in their network. When Wanda Wickizer had a brain hemorrhage in 2013, a Virginia hospital billed her $286,000 after a 20 percent “uninsured” discount on a hospital bill of $357,000 — the list price, according to chargemaster charges. Medicare would have paid less than $100,000 for her treatment.

Second, those list prices form the starting point for negotiations, allowing hospitals and insurers to take credit for beneficence when there is none.

I recently received an insurance statement for blood tests that were priced at $788.04; my insurer negotiated a “discount” of $725.35, for an agreed-upon price of $62.69 “to help save you money.” My insurer’s price was around 8 percent of the charge. Since my 10 percent copayment amounted to $6.27, my insurer happily informed me, “you saved 99 percent.”

Not!

If a supposedly $1,000 TV is “on sale” for $80, it’s not really a discount. It’s an absurd list price.

Just as airlines have been shown to exaggerate flight times so they can boast about on-time arrivals, hospitals set prices crazy high so they can tout their generous discounts (while insurers tout their negotiating prowess).

Another rationale for those prices is just plain greed. Dr. Warren Browner, the chief executive of California Pacific Medical Center, describes this as the “Saudi sheikh problem”: “You don’t really want to change your charges if you have a Saudi sheikh come in with a suitcase full of cash who’s going to pay full charges,” he said.

But in an era when American patients are expected to be good consumers and are paying more of their bills in the form of copays and deductibles, they have a right to the information on list prices. They have a right to make sure they are reasonable.

Although making chargemaster pricing public will not, by itself, reform our high-priced medical system, it is an important first step. Maybe, just maybe, a hospital will think twice before charging a $6,000 “operating room fee” for a routine colonoscopy if its competitor down the street is listing its price at $1,000. Making this information public should bring list prices more in line with what is actually paid by an insurer, a far better measure of value.

And while the lists are far from user-friendly, researchers and entrepreneurs can now create apps to make it easier for patients to match procedures to their codes and crunch the numbers. With access to list prices on your phone, you could reject the $300 sling in the emergency room and instead order one for one-tenth of the price on Amazon. You could see in advance the $399 rate your hospital charges for each allergen it applies in a skin test and avoid the $48,000 allergy test — with an $8,000 deductible.

As a next step, regulators should insist that these prices be easily accessible on hospitals’ home pages — perhaps in the place of “PAY YOUR BILL NOW” — and translated into plain English. Seema Verma, the head of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, has suggested that she may well do so.

Patients can help, too: Check out your hospital’s price list. If it’s not detailed or complete enough, demand more. For discrete items, like an MRI of the brain or a vitamin D blood test, take the trouble to scan the chargemaster for the item. Reject an overpriced procedure (even if your insurer is paying the bulk of the bill) and take your business elsewhere.

Justice Louis Brandeis famously said, “Sunlight is said to be the best of disinfectants; electric light the most efficient policeman.” But, in this case, the reform will work only if people take the trouble to look — and to act — now that the lights are turned on.

Posted in: Insurance

Leave a Comment (0) →

President Signs Bills Lifting Pharmacist ‘Gag Clauses’ on Drug Prices

President Signs Bills Lifting Pharmacist ‘Gag Clauses’ on Drug Prices

Earlier this week, President Trump signed two bipartisan bills into law that will allow pharmacists to tell patients they can save money on drugs by paying cash or trying a lower-cost alternative. At issue was the “broken” drug pricing system in the U.S. that was forcing patients to make decisions, which could have negatively impacted their health.

The bills, the Patient Right to Know Act and the Know the Lowest Price Act, prohibit health insurers and pharmacy benefit managers from using “gag clauses” that prevent pharmacists from sharing with patients the lower-cost options when they are purchasing medically necessary medication. In addition, the legislation ensures the Federal Trade Commission will have the necessary authorities to combat anti-competitive pay-for-delay settlement agreements between manufacturers of biological reference products and follow-on biologicals. The Patient Right to Know Act would apply similar “gag clause” protections to Medicare and MA plans.

Under the new legislation, pharmacists will be allowed, though not required, to tell patients about lower-cost options. If pharmacists don’t tell, then patients will have to ask about the cost of the medication. However, some pharmaceutical industry experts say although eliminating the gag clause is a step toward consumer transparency, it doesn’t address the issue of lowering actual drug costs, making it unclear how much of a tangible effect the legislation will have.

According to research published in JAMA in March, people with Medicare Part D drug insurance overpaid for prescriptions by $135 million in 2013. Copayments in those plans were higher than the cash price for nearly 1 in 4 drugs purchased in 2013. For 12 of the 20 most commonly prescribed drugs, patients overpaid by more than 33 percent.

Yet some critics say eliminating gag orders doesn’t address the causes of high drug prices. “As a country, we’re spending about $450 billion on prescription drugs annually,” said Steven Knievel, who works on drug price issues for Public Citizen, a consumer advocacy group. The modest savings gained by paying the cash price “is far short of what needs to happen to actually deliver the relief people need.”

Posted in: Advocacy

Leave a Comment (0) →

Three Common Mistakes in Transferring Ownership of a Medical Practice

Three Common Mistakes in Transferring Ownership of a Medical Practice

Physicians spend their careers building top-quality practices, but many devote too little attention to the architecture and terms by which the practices will be transferred at their retirement, death or disability. In our experience, there are three areas, which if neglected, will lead to problems at the crucial point when the ownership of this valuable asset changes hands.

Determining Value

Our clients are most concerned with the value of their practice. While some practitioners underestimate the value of their practice, many overestimate the amount which can be captured in the sale of the practice interest they own. A common mistake is to use a value that was read or heard about from a transaction elsewhere. That transaction price might have been determined by a purchaser who was limited in the amount they could pay, such as a hospital. The transaction might have occurred in a state with a higher managed care payer mix than your practice, or in a state with different non-compete laws regarding health care professionals. Practice valuations vary widely and for many reasons. Two practices in the same city and same specialty could have much different values. The terms of the transaction are another powerful force on sales prices and are rarely publicized. Even if you get the value accurately determined, there are still ways to create problems in the monetization of your practice value.

Clear Conversations

The documents relative to the transfer of a group practice ownership percentage should reflect the plan to sell at a future date, and the design of the manner by which the price will be determined. Even for valuable practice interests absent a clear design, potential buyers may feel tricked by a plan to transfer your share of the practice if it is developed late in your career. The time for this understanding is when younger doctors are brought in to the ownership. Buy-sell agreements and cross-purchase agreements serve to clarify expectations at the time of their drafting but should be reviewed every few years for relevance to the current situation, and any needed changes made. The greater the price desired for a practice, the more the need for clear design, pricing and terms. With a good legal architecture and a fairly determined price, your practice liquidation is almost ready for your time to sell, except for one additional issue.

The Fine Print

The legal obligation to pay the fairly determined price is often accomplished by the purchase of life and/or disability insurance on the selling practitioner. That can become a problem if the policies are never obtained, or the premiums payments are halted. In this situation, the buyer has a responsibility to pay a price agreed but with no funds to pay it. No one will be pleased with the outcome of this situation. Compound this problem with the common mistake of letting the practice price be set by the amount of life insurance proceeds, which could be afforded when the transfer architecture was designed, and you have a purchaser obligated to pay too much and with nothing but after-tax dollars from their future earnings. The CEO, chief emotional officer, at home will not respond well to this deal.

If you have a valuable practice, and you negotiate a fair price and terms for its sale, this can be a valuable way to exit your professional career and move to your next endeavor of success. It takes a little planning and periodic monitoring to gain top value.

Article contributed by Warren Averett CPAs and Advisors, official Gold Partner with the Medical Association.

Posted in: Management

Leave a Comment (0) →

Medical Association Applauds U.S. Rep. Tom Price, M.D., for HHS Secretary

Medical Association Applauds U.S. Rep. Tom Price, M.D., for HHS Secretary

MONTGOMERY – The Medical Association of the State of Alabama applauds the nomination of U.S. Rep. Tom Price for secretary of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

“Congressman Price is a strong advocate for preserving the patient-physician relationship, which includes fighting for patients’ rights as well as preserving physician autonomy,” said Medical Association President David Herrick, M.D. “Dr. Price has worked with our Medical Association leadership for many years on the national level to deregulate medicine and ease the administrative burdens placed on physicians. We feel that as a physician, Dr. Price understands firsthand what the health care system needs to get back on track so our physicians can focus more on treating their patients and less on red tape.”

For nearly 20 years, Dr. Price worked in private practice as an orthopaedic surgeon. Before coming to Washington he returned to Emory University School of Medicine as an Assistant Professor and Medical Director of the Orthopedic Clinic at Grady Memorial Hospital in Atlanta, teaching resident doctors in training. He received his Bachelor and Doctor of Medicine degrees from the University of Michigan and completed his Orthopaedic Surgery residency at Emory University.

Should Dr. Price be confirmed as secretary of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, he would be the first physician to serve in that position since 1989 and the third physician in the 63-year history of the department. The Medical Association strongly feels physician leadership of HHS and in the President’s Cabinet would provide the necessary perspective that has been lacking in the health care decisions of our country.

Posted in: Advocacy

Leave a Comment (0) →