BE 608
Start recording
As you conduct your research, it would be great if you could send me one or two articles that you found helpful in summarizing the reform so that I can post them for your classmates.
Health Affairs, JAMA, New England Journal of Medicine are great sources, so keep your eyes out for papers in these journals.
•Recap: How is Health Care Different?—The Case of Hospitals
•Mergers and Consolidation in the Hospital Industry
•Anti-Trust Policy in Health Care: Three Seminal Cases on Hospitals and Recent Anti-Trust Activity in Insurance Markets
•New Forms of Vertical Integration: CVS and Aetna
•“It’s the Prices Stupid,” Reinhardt, Anderson, Hussey and Petrosyan, Health Affairs, 2003
•“Resource Allocation in Health Care: The Allocation of Lifestyles to Providers,” Reinhardt The Milbank Quarterly
“… the allocation of resources in health care is seen to emerge from bargaining over the distribution of economic privilege among members of society.”
“…is the commodity “health care” sufficiently similar to the imaginary widgets, gidgets, gadgets, or gloobs to let a freely competitive
market arbitrate the inevitable conflict over resource allocation…?”
Appendectomy
C-section
How does the hospital market deviate from perfect competition?
How might this explain the higher prices observed in the US?
Why would prices be higher in the US?
Negotiate rates
Negotiate rates
Choose among providers--based on what?
Negotiate rates
Choose among providers
Competition among insurers affects mark-up above claims.
•Competition in markets takes place in 2 stages.
Stage 1: hospitals & insurers negotiate over network inclusion & price.
Stage 2: Hospitals compete for patients (not typically on price).
•Negotiated prices will depend on:
~ importance of provider is to insurer’s network
~ willingness of insurer to steer patients elsewhere
The balance of power has changed over time.
•Fee-for-service indemnity insurance predominated.
~Insurers were passive: little or no negotiating
~Plans covered “all willing providers”, paying “usual, customary and reasonable” fees
•Hospitals competed via a “medical arms race.”
~High tech capital, non-clinical amenities as a signal of quality
~Cost-based reimbursement => excess capacity & incentive for over-use
This led to high spending, spurring the rise of managed care.
•Insurers began using supply-side strategies to lower costs.
~Aimed at lowering both P and Q
•Utilization review used to control costs by reducing quantities
~Reducing admissions, unnecessary tests and procedures
~Managing care = saying no
•Negotiating lower prices with providers
~Selective contracting: offering volume in return for lower prices
Gains from managed care were not sustained. There were several factors behind the “managed care backlash.”
1.Employers wanted broad networks
2.Provider push-back
3.Provider consolidation
Source: Kaufman Hall Transactions Data
What are potential benefits of mergers?
What are potential costs of mergers?
Selden et al Health Affairs 2015
Mergers increased market concentration, as measured by the Herfindahl-Hirschman Index (HHI).
HHI > 2,500 is considered highly concentrated.
2,500 = 4 equal firms
5,000 = duopoly
10,000 = monopoly
DOJ/FTC Guidelines: in highly concentrated markets, mergers that raise HHI by 100+ points merit scrutiny.
From Cutler &Scott-Morton’s analysis of 306 Hospital Referral Regions:
•Competition in a “typical” market:
~1980s: 5 major competitor + smaller players.
~2011: 1 dominant system, 2-3 fringe players.
On average, top 3 systems accounted for 77% of admissions.
Cooper et al. 2019
Prices in monopoly markets are about 12% higher than in markets with 4+ players
Monopoly hospitals are less likely to enter into risk-sharing contracts with insurers
In the past 30+ years, there have been more anti-trust trials in health care than any other industry.
•1984-1994: FTC/DOJ won 5 of 6 merger cases
•1994 – 1999: FTC/DOJ lost 8 consecutive cases
•2002: FTC began retrospective review of consummated mergers
•Since 2005: several mergers successfully challenged, but many go through
-4 hospital mergers blocked in last 2 years
-Anti-trust cases against hospitals with anti-competitive practices (Sutter Health)
Between 2010-2017: 561 successful hospital mergers
•In all industries, competition benefits consumers
~Lower prices
~Better quality products and services
~Increased choice, selection, convenience and innovation
•The antitrust agencies (FTC and DOJ) challenge mergers that reduce competition sufficiently to harm consumers.
•Actions are grounded in economic analysis.
~Will a merger create market power that will lead to higher prices or lower quality?
Antitrust laws protect competition not competitors.
•Grand Rapids, MI: Butterworth-Blodgett merger, 1996
•Evanston, IL: Evanston Northwestern-Highland Park merger, 2000
The Grand Rapids market, 1995
•Butterworth (529 beds)
•Blodgett (515 beds)
•St. Mary’s (230)
•Metropolitan (238)
Butterworth and Blodgett propose to merge and form
Pre-merger HHI: 2863
Post-merger HHI:5247
The Grand Rapids market, 1995
•Butterworth (529 beds)
•Blodgett (515 beds)
•St. Mary’s (230)
•Metropolitan (238)
•Court accepted FTC’s market definition and HHI analysis
~Agreed that merged entity would have “substantial market power”
•Defendants made two main arguments:
1.Consolidation would produce efficiencies
~Reduce duplication
~Both hospitals were about to make major capital investments
2. Hospitals were non-profit and would not exploit market power
~Efficiencies would be passed on to the community
Source: CMS
What do non-profits maximize?
•Possible models of non-profit behavior
~Altruistic, maximizing social benefit?
~For-profits in disguise?
•Neither model fits perfectly, though non-profits look more like for-profits than public hospitals.
~Provide the same (low) amount of charity care
~May have a stronger preference for volume than for-profits
~Charge higher prices when they have market power
Court ruled in favor of the defendants
•Spectrum signed a “Community Commitment” promising to limit price increases for 7 years to no more than regional inflation.
•Not clear efficiencies were realized
•Prices did not increase beyond what was promised in the first 7 years, but were increased 12% in the first year after the agreement was lifted.
No guarantee that Spectrum hasn’t exploited market power since
~Spectrum may have competed less vigorously on other dimensions
~Merger led to consolidation in physician market
~Merger may have distorted competition in insurance market (Spectrum owns Priority Health)
Evanston Northwestern Healthcare
Highland Park Hospital (200 beds)
Merger in 2000 was not challenged by anti-trust agencies.
Prospective analysis of mergers is difficult
•Research is limited by a dearth of data on transaction prices.
•Merger effects must be predicted based on theory and simulation models
•Even when models are not sensitive to assumptions, they can be disputed
2002: FTC decided to review the results of past mergers
•Analysis could be done using actual transaction prices
•Provides direct evidence on price effects
•Provides a test of the econometric models
Results show large price increases after Evanston/Highland Park and other consummated mergers.
In 2005, FTC staff challenged the merger.
Their analysis of actual prices showed that average prices paid by managed care companies increased by nearly 50%.
Internal documents and testimony corroborated this.
•Court ruled in favor of the FTC. But, several years after the merger the “eggs could not be unscrambled.”
•Key result: Court accepted FTC’s argument that the relevant market definition is based on Stage 1 negotiations between payers and hospitals, not patients’ choice of hospitals.
•Instead of divestiture, the two hospitals were required to negotiate separately with insurers.
St. Luke’s Health System
Largest system in Idaho
2012, entered into an agreement to acquire Saltzer Medical Group
Saltzer Medical Group
•Largest independent group with 40+ physicians
•Headquartered in Nampa, ID
•Largest group of PCPs in Nampa
Combined entity would have controlled 80% of PCP market
2013: Deal challenged by FTC & Idaho Attorney General
How is this different from the previous two examples?
Possible Benefits? Possible Costs?
Benefits:
•Better care coordination
•Administrative scale economies
•Facilitates investment in IT
•Reduced admin burden on providers
Better health outcomes at lower cost
Potential Costs:
•Higher private prices
•Patients diverted to higher-cost hospitals
•Increased Medicare spending due to facility fees
Higher spending without necessarily producing health gains
Source: MedPac, Report to Congress, June 2017
Source: Avalere Health, “Medicare Payment Differentials Across Outpatient Settings of Care," Feb. 2016
Defendants claimed that merger
•was necessary for improved clinical integration and quality-improving investments like electronic health record.
•would lead to savings from improved efficiencies.
•But, internal documents contradicted these arguments
Government countered that
•Clinical integration could be achieved other ways.
•Past acquisitions of practices had not produced savings.
•Past acquisitions had led to higher negotiated prices.
The Court ruled for the government.
Just four insurance companies--United Healthcare, Aetna, Cigna, and the Blues (Blue Cross and Blue Shield Association)--control almost 90% of the market share of private insurance.
What is good and bad about market concentration in insurance markets?
In 2015, Anthem struck a deal to acquire Cigna.
Challenged by DOJ as anti-competitive
Strongest argument from defense:
Government's argument:
Ultimately the court blocked the merger, which was abandoned (after appeal) in 2018.
Humana/Aetna $34 billion merger deal also blocked by courts in 2017.
Insurance companies are not just concerned about negotiating with hospitals. Drug prices have been an increasing portion of medical spending and are likely to increase over time.
A new type of vertical integration proposed between health insurance companies and pharmaceutical benefits management companies (PBMs) :
Both passed regulatory hurdles and completed acquisitions in 2018.
Most large companies keep prescription drug coverage separate from medical coverage.
Deal is good for CVS too:
Possible problems?
On the other hand, now that Aetna has "locked in" CVS as a benefits manager--will that give them an unfair edge in the insurance market?
The pharmacy market is also totally concentrated--dominated by CVS and Walgreens--will it be good for consumers to give one of these entities even more market power?
What do hospital and insurer markets look like in your state?
Has there been a change (e.g. a big merger)?
Was there a policy response (FTC or DOJ law suit or other action by the state)?