Search

The different tax treatment of government, nonprofit, and for-profit hospitals implies different charity care obligations, with the greatest obligation for government hospitals and the least for for-profit hospitals. Prior research has not examined charity care provision among all three ownership types at the national level. Using 2018 Medicare Hospital Cost Reports, we compared charity care provision across 1,024 government, 2,709 nonprofit, and 930 for-profit hospitals. In aggregate, nonprofit hospitals spent $2.3 of every $100 in total expenses incurred on charity care, which was less than government ($4.1) or for-profit ($3.8) hospitals. No hospital ownership type outperformed the other two types with respect to charity care provision in a majority of hospital service areas containing all three types. Using different kinds of analyses, we also found wide variation in charity care provision within ownership types and a lack of a consistent pattern across ownership types. These results suggest that many government and nonprofit hospitals' charity care provision was not aligned with their charity care obligations arising from their favorable tax treatment. Policy makers may consider initiatives to enhance hospitals' charity care provision, particularly hospitals with government and nonprofit ownership. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The financial viability of rural hospitals has been a matter of serious concern, with ongoing closures affecting rural residents' access to medical services. We examined the financial viability of 1,004 US rural hospitals that had consistent rural status in 2011-17. The median overall profit margin improved for nonprofit critical access hospitals (from 2.5 percent to 3.2 percent) but declined for other hospitals (from 3.0 percent to 2.6 percent for nonprofit non-critical access hospitals, from 3.2 percent to 0.4 percent for for-profit critical access hospitals, and from 5.7 percent to 1.6 percent for for-profit non-critical access hospitals). Occupancy rate and charge markup were positively associated with overall margins: In 2017 hospitals with low versus high occupancy rates had median overall profit margins of 0.1 percent versus 4.7 percent, and hospitals with low versus high charge markups had median overall margins of 1.8 percent versus 3.5 percent. Rural hospital financial viability deteriorated in states that did not expand eligibility for Medicaid and was lower in the South. Rural hospitals that closed during the study period had a median overall profit margin of -3.2 percent in their final year before closure. Policy makers should compare the incremental cost of providing essential services between hospitals and other settings to balance access and efficiency. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses 2012-16 data which shows that air ambulance service charges were 4.1-9.5 times higher than Medicare payments for the same services in 2016. Topics covered include the varying charges across the U.S., with the highest ones coming from the largest providers, and a market failure's possible causation of the charges, with patients lacking control over the air ambulance provider that transports them. Also noted is the need to regulate air ambulance billing practices.

Much research has focused on differences in hospital prices paid by private (commercial) versus public (Medicare and Medicaid) health insurers. Far less is known about price differences across commercial payers--health maintenance organizations (HMOs) or preferred provider organizations (PPOs) versus other payers, such as casualty (automobile), workers' compensation, and travel insurers. We found that other insurers had far less negotiating power with hospitals than commercial HMO/PPO insurers did. In the period 2010-16, the median price paid by HMO/PPO insurers for hospital services in Florida increased from 1.9 times to 2.5 times the Medicare price, respectively, while the median price paid by other insurers increased from 2.8 times to 3.8 times the Medicare price. Commercial HMO/PPO insurers' prices were similar across major hospital systems, regardless of ownership, while other insurers' prices differed substantially across systems. In 2016 the twenty hospitals with the highest prices (7.8-14.1 times the Medicare rate) for other insurers in Florida were all affiliated with the Hospital Corporation of America. These hospitals generated 24 percent of their commercial net revenue (median) from other payers, despite treating a relatively small proportion of patients covered by these payers. Protecting patients with other insurance from high hospital prices requires efforts by policy makers, hospitals, and insurers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Many hospital executives and economists have suggested that since Medicare adopted a hospital prospective payment system in 1985, prices on the hospital chargemaster (an exhaustive list of the prices for all hospital procedures and supplies) have become irrelevant. However, using 2013 nationally representative hospital data from Medicare, we found that a one-unit increase in the charge-to-cost ratio (chargemaster price divided by Medicare-allowable cost) was associated with $64 higher patient care revenue per adjusted discharge. Furthermore, hospitals appeared to systematically adjust their charge-to-cost ratios: The average ratio ranged between 1.8 and 28.5 across patient care departments, and for-profit hospitals were associated with a 2.30 and a 2.07 higher charge-to-cost ratio than government and nonprofit hospitals, respectively. We also found correlation between the proportion of uninsured patients, a hospital's system affiliation, and its regional power with the charge-to-cost ratio. These findings suggest that hospitals still consider the chargemaster price to be an important way to enhance revenue. Policy makers might consider developing additional policy tools that improve markup transparency to protect patients from unexpectedly high charges for specific services. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Using Medicare cost reports, we examined the fifty US hospitals with the highest charge-to-cost ratios in 2012. These hospitals have markups (ratios of charges over Medicare-allowable costs) approximately ten times their Medicare-allowable costs compared to a national average of 3.4 and a mode of 2.4. Analysis of the fifty hospitals showed that forty-nine are for profit (98 percent), forty-six are owned by for-profit hospital systems (92 percent), and twenty (40 percent) operate in Florida. One for-profit hospital system owns half of these fifty hospitals. While most public and private health insurers do not use hospital charges to set their payment rates, uninsured patients are commonly asked to pay the full charges, and out-of-network patients and casualty and workers' compensation insurers are often expected to pay a large portion of the full charges. Because it is difficult for patients to compare prices, market forces fail to constrain hospital charges. Federal and state governments may want to consider limitations on the charge-to-cost ratio, some form of all-payer rate setting, or mandated price disclosure to regulate hospital markups. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A response by the authors to a letter to the editor about their study on factors associated with the profitability of hospitals, not hospital systems is presented.