Saturday, July 29, 2006

Policy: A Word About Transparency

Price transparency has been one of those sleepy issues that has been gaining steam in the courts (around prices charged to the uninsured) and in the recent media regarding the White House's proposal to force providers to publically disclose how much they are being paid by insurance companies. For a quick synopsis of the issue click here.

So who should cares about pricing technicalities in the health care industry?

We should all care.

Granted, pricing transparency increases competition (which is why many providers are against public disclosure) - but, I believe, it is instrumental to helping patients (and their employers) better understand where their moneys (copays and insurance payments) are going (which incidentally, is likely to the insurance company given their huge windfalls this fiscal year).
In short, price transparency will force providers to compete within the broad categories of:
  • Price
  • Quality
  • Convenience

While the government will continue to ensure a basic level of quality in institutions, price transparency will help people decide whether they want to valet park, watch HGTV post surgery, and have a massage prior to discharge. It will help patients decide whether convenience is more important than price, and force providers to compete in all three dimensions (truly forcing health care costs to decrease).

We have it today in the Minute Clinics. Here we pay $60 dollars to get a prescription for the cold I know my child already has. Since they take my insurance, it's the same price as a primary care doc, so they win my business based on convenience. If they don't take my insurance, I assess if $60 dollars worth the convenience. If I don't have insurance, they compete on price (as a primary care doc is $100 plus - I think). As the quality of my treatment is based less on diagnosis and more on treatment...I'm willing to be assessed by the nurse practitioner.

I've used them twice... and both times the nurse sent me a personal thank you note....another dimension of the quality category.

Yet I get distracted...

The real point of transparency in my mind is that it re-builds trust in the industry. Without the patient's trust that s/he is getting appropriate service for what they have paid into the system...people will grow to resent the system itself. Without transparency, patients will feel doctors are seeing them quickly because they want to make a greater margin on their business and they'll believe hospitals want to use the cheaper hip implant to simply save money, or they'll think the insurance company is just pocketing dollars I'll never see for decades.

Without transparency we will lose the public's trust. And that is not a policy dilemma, that is a cultural backslide that will take generations to fix...just as we're all getting older.



1 Comments:

At 5:44 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I think it would be enormously helpful if Medicare rates for all DRG codes were readily available on the CMS website. Consumers could at least then use that information as a benchmark for assessing the reasonableness of their own bills.

I do not think someone without insurance, even if wealthy, should have to pay more than a 15%-20% premium above Medicare rates. Even when insurance is paying most of the bill, many policies have a lifetime benefit cap, so pricing does matter, at least for those of us who incur significant medical costs.

For hospitals that believe they are low cost, or at least competitive, in their market and have a robust enough accounting system to determine with reasonable accuracy what their costs are, it could be a competitive advantage for them to provide some leadership on the pricing transparency issue. Especially with respect to outpatient services and inpatient surgeries that are scheduled in advance, pricing transparency should be easy to provide (including package pricing) if hospitals really wanted to move in that direction.

Hospitals that perform a teaching function or provide care to an unusually large number of uninsured patients should be compensated for those costs via direct federal or state subsidy.

If basic costs are uncompetitive, they should downsize or close.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home