Monopoly on Healthcare: New Laws and Rising Costs Create a Surge of Supersizing Hospitals

Serious

Veteran
Supporter
Joined
Apr 30, 2012
Messages
80,159
Reputation
14,319
Daps
190,900
Reppin
1st Round Playoff Exits
Hospitals across the nation are being swept up in the biggest wave of mergers since the 1990s, a development that is creating giant hospital systems that could one day dominate American health care and drive up costs.

The consolidations are being driven by a confluence of powerful forces, not least of which is President Obama’s signature health care law, the Affordable Care Act. That law, many experts say, is transforming the economics of health care and pushing a growing number of hospitals into the arms of suitors.

The changes are unfolding with remarkable speed. Two big for-profit hospital chains, Community Health Systems of Tennessee and Health Management Associates of Florida, are combining in a $7.6 billion deal.

In New York City, Mount Sinai Medical Center, which is one of the country’s oldest and largest private nonprofit hospitals, is buying the parent of Beth Israel Medical Center and St. Luke’s and Roosevelt Hospitals. Tenet Healthcare of Dallas, which operates in 10 states, is buying Vanguard Health Systems of Nashville, a network of 28 hospitals and facilities that includes Detroit Medical Center.

In fact, Booz & Company, a consulting firm, predicts that 1,000 of the nation’s roughly 5,000 hospitals could seek out mergers in the next five to seven years.

“There’s immense logic for them to become large super-regional systems, even some national systems,” said David W. Johnson, a managing director for BMO Capital Markets, which advises nonprofit health systems. Some chains are merging to increase their size and their negotiating clout with insurers, while others are trying to reduce costs and improve care, he said.

Some economists and health insurance companies worry that the trend could raise health care costs.

“The rhetoric is all about efficiency,” said Karen Ignagni, the chief executive of America’s Health Insurance Plans, a trade group that represents insurers. “The reality is all about higher prices.”

Whatever the outcome, hospitals are merging faster and in greater numbers than they have in years. After holding steady through much of the 2000s, the number of deals doubled to 105 in 2012 from 50 in 2009, according to Irving Levin Associates, a health care research firm. That is still less than half the annual peak during the last merger wave, in the late 1990s, but Booz and others say this is only the beginning.

Hospital executives say they have little choice but to combine given the coming changes in the industry. Many hospitals are struggling with lower payments from the federal government and declining patient admissions. They are also being confronted with fundamental changes in how they are paid under the AffordableCare Act and by private insurers.

Instead of being paid on volume, rewarded for filling beds and performing more tests and procedures, hospitals are becoming responsible for more of the total cost of a patient’s care. As a result, they have an incentive to keep patients healthy — and out of their facilities.

By combining, hospitals can reduce costs in back-office activities like billing and devote more financial resources to investing in expensive electronic medical records systems and physician practices to better follow patients outside the hospital. Under the new state exchanges created by the federal health care law, consumers will be able to tell the difference in hospital prices between markets that have consolidated and those that have not, Ms. Ignagni said.

The plans have similar designs, but a policy offered by the same insurer in, for instance, Northern California, where hospitals have merged, will be more expensive than one offered in Southern California, where the systems are smaller, she said.

Federal regulators are concerned that the growing number of mergers could lead to anticompetitive practices. The Federal Trade Commission has increased its examination of the deals and has blocked a handful of transactions.

Last year, two hospital chains in Illinois, OSF Healthcare System of Illinois and Rockford Health System, abandoned plans to merge after the F.T.C. challenged the deal on the expectation that the combined hospitals would control 64 percent of acute-care inpatient services. That, regulators said, would allow the combined entity to raise rates and “impose a financial burden on local employers and employees,” through higher insurance premiums, co-pays and out-of-pocket expenses.

For the most part, however, the mergers continue unchallenged among for-profit systems as well as nonprofit hospitals.

Roman Catholic-sponsored systems have formed some of the first national nonprofit chains, and some worry that Catholic hospitals’ growth and acquisitions of non-Catholic hospitals could limit patient access to services like birth control.

In May, for example, Trinity Health and Catholic Health East joined forces to create an 82-hospital system in 21 states. Ascension Health, the largest Catholic nonprofit health system, added 35 hospitals to its network of 78 this year when it closed a deal to acquire a hospital system based in Tulsa, Okla. Ascension has teamed with Oak Hill Capital Partners, a private investment firm, to help finance some of its purchases in the future.

“There isn’t an independent hospital out there that is not thinking about this,” said Gary Ahlquist, a senior partner at Booz, the consulting firm, referring to the mergers. “At the top of the list is the question, Who should I merge with?”

The last wave of mergers took place in the mid-1990s as hospitals joined forces to combat the potential threat from managed care and a giant for-profit chain now called HCA Healthcare. As those threats receded, mergers slowed.


“Today, the motivations for mergers are a lot broader,” said Paul Ginsburg, the president of the Center for Studying Health System Change.

“These independents, or smaller hospitals, are very worried about their ability to do well in the future,” he said.

Analysts say there is not a one-size-fits-all model for this merger wave. While some systems are fanning out across the country, others appear to be focusing on a certain state or region.

But as the hospital merger boom continues, hospitals fiercely holding onto their independence may find it more difficult to compete against bigger, leaner organizations, say analysts.

“There are hospitals out there that have been independent for 80 years and they’re saying, ‘We’re going to be independent for the next 100 years,’ ” said Lisa Goldstein, an analyst of nonprofit hospitals at Moody’s Investors Service. “That’s going to be a tall order. As other hospitals consolidate and grow around you, whatever niche you had will vaporize.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/13/b...ls-may-lead-to-bigger-bills-for-patients.html
0813-biz-webHOSPITAL.png

shyt's about to get ugly...

:patrice: Lowkey I'm worried about a raising monopoly on hospitals. Especially in "urban demographics", which might end up in worse predicaments than previously before...
 
Last edited:

Crakface

...
Joined
May 4, 2012
Messages
18,500
Reputation
1,530
Daps
25,708
Reppin
L.A
Yet all of these black millionares wont invest money into building a hospital for black people in these neighborhoods. It is what it is.
 

Crakface

...
Joined
May 4, 2012
Messages
18,500
Reputation
1,530
Daps
25,708
Reppin
L.A
word..
tear down churches, synagogues and mosques in favor in schools and hospitals
:skip:
The only one getting paid in the black community is the preacher. You'd think theyd have some kind of coalition to pool all that church money into a hospital or a school run by all of these black people getting BA's in business that then go on to work to excel in a white corporation. In other communities the churchs give out loans to the citizens. In the black community the church is a hustler. :heh:
 

Serious

Veteran
Supporter
Joined
Apr 30, 2012
Messages
80,159
Reputation
14,319
Daps
190,900
Reppin
1st Round Playoff Exits
The only one getting paid in the black community is the preacher. You'd think theyd have some kind of coalition to pool all that church money into a hospital or a school run by all of these black people getting BA's in business that then go on to work to excel in a white corporation. In other communities the churchs give out loans to the citizens. In the black community the church is a hustler. :heh:
Only problem with this, there'd have to be a series of unified "ethnic" owned hospitals, willing to link up with other "ethnic" owned hospitals, otherwise they'd be pushed out of business by these merging hospitals...

The marketplace for Hospitals is about to resemble, walmarts' domination over mom & pop stores...

Shhhhhhhit, the black community can't even push out enough doctors...
 

Crakface

...
Joined
May 4, 2012
Messages
18,500
Reputation
1,530
Daps
25,708
Reppin
L.A
Only problem with this, there'd have to be a series of unified "ethnic" owned hospitals, willing to link up with other "ethnic" owned hospitals, otherwise they'd be pushed out of business by these merging hospitals...

The marketplace of Hospitals about to resemble, walmarts' domination over mom & pop stores...
All it takes is talent and good ideas for additional services. Philosophically, black people have every reason to believe why their endeavors will fail until someone else does it first. Then comes the typical rhetoric.


*man, i gotta get on my grind.* :noah:
 

tru_m.a.c

IC veteran
Staff member
Supporter
Joined
May 1, 2012
Messages
31,318
Reputation
6,840
Daps
90,820
Reppin
Gaithersburg, MD via Queens/LI
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/13/b...ls-may-lead-to-bigger-bills-for-patients.html
shyt's about to get ugly...

:patrice: Lowkey I'm worried about a raising monopoly on hospitals. Especially in "urban demographics", which might end up in worse predicaments than previously before...

Biased article.

Doesn't touch on the fact that a lot of hospitals are closing/on a tight financial budget due to the economy.

Secondly with the rising cost, it doesn't touch on the point that if hospital A is negotiating for a price, that doesn't actually determine the cost of the care. It only determines the reimbursement which is what the insurer AGREES to pay. All this article shows is that with more consolidation, hospitals will have a better chance of recouping on losses. It doesn't actually ask if the amount for the care was necessary in the first place.
 

Serious

Veteran
Supporter
Joined
Apr 30, 2012
Messages
80,159
Reputation
14,319
Daps
190,900
Reppin
1st Round Playoff Exits
Biased article.

Doesn't touch on the fact that a lot of hospitals are closing/on a tight financial budget due to the economy.
:salute: had no idea about the numerous hospitals closing....

Just looked this up in my own area:
http://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2013/04/03/4-socal-hospitals-close-their-er-doors/

:patrice: A bit thrown off by the report....

Have you ever heard of a scheme about hospitals recruiting homeless people, just perform operations, then giving the homeless people a "kickback"

In the summer of 2012, the company agreed to pay $16.5 million to settle allegations that homeless people were recruited to undergo unnecessary medical procedures that were later billed to Medicare and MediCal.
 

tru_m.a.c

IC veteran
Staff member
Supporter
Joined
May 1, 2012
Messages
31,318
Reputation
6,840
Daps
90,820
Reppin
Gaithersburg, MD via Queens/LI
:salute: had no idea about the numerous hospitals closing....

Just looked this up in my own area:
http://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2013/04/03/4-socal-hospitals-close-their-er-doors/

:patrice: A bit thrown off by the report....

Have you ever heard of a scheme about hospitals recruiting homeless people, just perform operations, then giving the homeless people a "kickback"

Sounds familiar. Haven't had to do much work on that type of compliance issue.

Makes sense though. That's one of the main reasons we are changing the health care system. Physicians are paid on a fee for service basis. More patients = more money. Also uncompensated care/charity care is a tax write off for certain types of hospitals.
 

tru_m.a.c

IC veteran
Staff member
Supporter
Joined
May 1, 2012
Messages
31,318
Reputation
6,840
Daps
90,820
Reppin
Gaithersburg, MD via Queens/LI
:salute: had no idea about the numerous hospitals closing....

Just looked this up in my own area:
http://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2013/04/03/4-socal-hospitals-close-their-er-doors/

:patrice: A bit thrown off by the report....

Have you ever heard of a scheme about hospitals recruiting homeless people, just perform operations, then giving the homeless people a "kickback"

I forgot to add, the reason why this article is so biased, is because once you throw out the word "monopoly," regular citizens automatically think: rockefeller, tyc00n, layoffs, poor pay. The true story is that the economy and our health needs are forcing hospitals to consolidate. Its better for them when they're at the negotiating table. The same is true for physician groups and insurance company.

Sure they're consolidating and merging health systems, but are they expanding facilities and their workforce as well?
 

Serious

Veteran
Supporter
Joined
Apr 30, 2012
Messages
80,159
Reputation
14,319
Daps
190,900
Reppin
1st Round Playoff Exits
I forgot to add, the reason why this article is so biased, is because once you throw out the word "monopoly," regular citizens automatically think: rockefeller, tyc00n, layoffs, poor pay. The true story is that the economy and our health needs are forcing hospitals to consolidate. Its better for them when they're at the negotiating table. The same is true for physician groups and insurance company.

Sure they're consolidating and merging health systems, but are they expanding facilities and their workforce as well?
Nah it didn't really say.

:patrice: guess I'm trying to look at from my "limited" understanding of economics...

I was guessing the mergers would breed less competition, as well as knock off "smaller" independent hospitals whom were unable to make up for "potentially" lost profit margins, that larger health groups could afford to keep from going under...
 

tru_m.a.c

IC veteran
Staff member
Supporter
Joined
May 1, 2012
Messages
31,318
Reputation
6,840
Daps
90,820
Reppin
Gaithersburg, MD via Queens/LI
Nah it didn't really say.

:patrice: guess I'm trying to look at from my "limited" understanding of economics...

I was guessing the mergers would breed less competition, as well as knock off "smaller" independent hospitals whom were unable to make up for "potentially" lost profit margins, that larger health groups could afford to keep from going under...

Less competition doesn't necessarily mean the "cost" of health care would increase. Unlike goods sold at market, nobody KNOWS the true value of an actual medical visit. The rise in "cost" could simply mean that now you have to pay the true cost of care (increased reimbursement).

Some hospitals can/will charge you 50 bucks for aspirin as an inpatient.

For the price she was charged for her insulin during her 18 hour stay at St. Luke's Hospital, Zachor would have enough to cover her out-of-pocket expenses for a three-month supply under her private Medicare Advantage plan if she had been home. The tab for one water pill to control high blood pressure could buy a three-week supply. And the bill for one calcium tablet could have purchased enough for three weeks from the national chain pharmacy where she gets them over-the-counter.

That's what's so great about the recent NYT article:

The data was compiled from hospital claims submitted to Medicare by more than 3,300 hospitals seeking fee-for-service reimbursements for the 100 most common inpatient treatments in fiscal-year 2011. The prices at issue — sometimes called “chargemaster” prices — are not what most people pay. They are far higher than what Medicare pays, which is close to the real cost of providing the service, and also higher than what private insurers pay because they negotiate for discounts.

The only patients likely to be charged the full listed prices are those with little or no insurance and no purchaser to bargain on their behalf. Many insured patients also face higher premiums or co-payments because their plans reimburse the hospitals based on discounts from the listed prices. The listed prices varied wildly from one part of the country to another and even within the same city or region, seemingly without any good reason or any relationship to the quality of care delivered.

For example, a Times analysis published Friday found that the Bayonne Medical Center in New Jersey typically charged $99,689 for treating each case of chronic lung disease, 17 times as much as Medicare paid in reimbursement. The price for a joint replacement with artificial hips or knees ranged from a low of $5,300 in a hospital in Ada, Okla., to a high of $223,000 at a hospital in Monterey Park, Calif., a 40-fold difference that cannot be explained by regional differences in wages, the sickness of the patients, or a hospital’s teaching responsibilities. The charge for treating heart failure patients in hospitals in Jackson, Miss., ranged from $9,000 to $51,000.
 
Top