Share This Page

Health care caps pit quality vs. cost

| Thursday, May 15, 2014, 9:00 p.m.

WASHINGTON — The Obama administration has given the go-ahead for insurers and employers to implement a cost-control strategy that puts a hard dollar limit on how much health plans will pay for some expensive procedures, such as knee and hip replacements.

Some experts worry that such a move would surprise patients who choose to use more expensive hospitals. The cost difference would leave them with big medical bills that they'd have to pay themselves.

That could undercut key financial protections in President Obama's health care law that apply not just to the health insurance exchanges, but to most job-based coverage as well.

Others say it's a valuable tool to reduce costs and help keep premiums in check.

There is concern among some federal regulators. A recent administration policy ruling went to unusual lengths, acknowledging that the cost-control strategy “may be a subterfuge” for “otherwise prohibited limitations on coverage.”

Nonetheless, the departments of Labor and Health and Human Services said the practice — known as reference pricing — could continue. Plans must use a “reasonable method” to ensure “adequate access to quality providers.” Regulators asked for public comment, saying they may publish more guidance.

HHS spokeswoman Erin Shields Britt said in a statement that the administration is monitoring the effects of reference pricing on access to quality services and will work to ensure that financial protections for consumers are not undermined.

One way the new approach is different is that it sets a dollar limit on how much the health plan will pay for a given procedure. Most insurance pays a percentage of costs, and those costs can vary from hospital to hospital. The insurance pays the same percentage whether a patient's choice of hospital charges more or less for the procedure.

Some experts are concerned.

“The problem ... from the patient's perspective is that at the end of the day, that is who gets left holding the bag,” said Karen Pollitz of the nonpartisan Kaiser Family Foundation, formerly a top consumer protection regulator in the Obama administration.

The new pricing approach is not yet on consumers' radar, but it's gaining ground. The Mercer benefits consulting firm said 12 percent of the largest employers were using reference pricing last year, nearly double the 7 percent in 2012.

The approach has been pioneered in California by CalPERS, a giant agency that manages health and retirement benefits for public employees and is the nation's second-largest purchaser of health benefits after the federal government.

CalPERS started with knee and hip replacements in 2011, steering patients to hospitals that had been vetted for quality and charged $30,000 or less.

Ann Boynton, CalPERS' health benefits director, said the program has been a success, with patients able to choose from about 50 hospitals.

“People do not feel like we went to bargain-basement hospitals where the quality is not good,” she said. “The quality is the same and, in some instances, better.”

Economist James C. Robinson of the University of California at Berkeley studied the CalPERS experiment and found that many patients shifted to lower-cost hospitals, saving money, and that expensive hospitals responded by cutting their prices.

Although insurers don't appear to be using reference pricing on the new health exchanges, Robinson said he thinks it's only a matter of time.

“The vast majority of people buying on the exchanges are price sensitive,” he said. “People, when they are spending their own money, tend to go for thinner benefits.”

However, the strategy appears to be suitable only for a subset of medical care: procedures and tests that are frequently performed, where the prices charged vary widely, but the quality of results generally does not. In addition to knee and hip replacements, that could include such procedures as MRIs and other imaging tests, cataract surgery and colonoscopies.

Robert Berenson, a physician and health policy expert at the Urban Institute think tank, said he worries that advocates of reference pricing may be overlooking quality differences.

“There are differences in MRIs and in how a hip replacement is done,” he said. “If you are going to say ‘Our judgment is better than your doctor's,' then you've got to meet tests that you are actually assuring quality and safety.”

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.