Search

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]

To identify the characteristics of the most profitable US hospitals, we examined the profitability of acute care hospitals in fiscal year 2013, measured as net income from patient care services per adjusted discharge. Based on Medicare Cost Reports and Final Rule Data, the median hospital lost $82 for each such discharge. Forty-five percent of hospitals were profitable, with 2.5 percent earning more than $2,475 per adjusted discharge. The ten most profitable hospitals, seven of which were nonprofit, each earned more than $163 million in total profits from patient care services. Hospitals with for-profit status, higher markups, system affiliation, or regional power, as well as those located in states with price regulation, tended to be more profitable than other hospitals. Hospitals that treated a higher proportion of Medicare patients, had higher expenditures per adjusted discharge, were located in counties with a high proportion of uninsured patients, or were located in states with a dominant insurer or greater health maintenance organization (HMO) penetration had lower profitability than hospitals that did not have these characteristics. These findings can inform policy reforms, while providing a baseline against which to measure the impact of any subsequent reforms. [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]

OBJECTIVES: Self-insured employers cover more people than Medicare, Medicaid, or direct purchasers of private insurance. This study examined the ability of self-insured employers to negotiate hospital prices and the relationship between hospital prices and employer market power in the United States. STUDY DESIGN: Repeated cross-section analysis of commercial claims. METHODS: We used the US Census Bureau County Business Patterns data to estimate employer market power at the metropolitan statistical area (MSA)--year level and used the Truven Health MarketScan commercial claims to estimate mean hospital prices and price ratios at the MSA-year level (2010-2016). We calculated descriptive statistics for employer market power, mean hospitalization prices, and a case mix--adjusted price ratio measure during the study period and analyzed the 10 most concentrated labor markets. We estimated MSA-year--level ordinary least squares regressions of hospitalization price and the price ratio measure on employer market power. RESULTS: Large self-insured employers had concentrated market power in very few MSAs in 2016. The mean value of our employer market power measure was 62 for 2016, compared with the mean value of 5410 for hospital market power in the United States. Regression analyses find a slight relationship: A 1-point increase in employer market power was associated with a $6.61 decrease in the hospitalization price (mean = $20,813), but this result becomes statistically insignificant once the models control for hospital wages. CONCLUSIONS: Employer market power is low in most MSAs. Self-insured employers may consider building purchase alliances with state and local government employee groups to enhance their market power and lower negotiated prices for hospital services. [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.