September 2009

You are currently browsing the monthly archive for September 2009.

Many people have asked me, what do you think about the Baucus health reform plan?  Taking the bird’s eye view, the Baucus plan does a very good job at expanding insurance coverage.  Eligibility limits for public plans (i.e., Medicaid and SCHIP) are more generous.  Lower middle class and middle class individuals qualify for health insurance subsidies to purchase private insurance.  The Health Insurance Exchange should diminish the fear of losing one’s insurance when you switch jobs.  Overall, Baucus has built on existing health infrastructure to expand health access.  

By building on existing infrastructure, what he will do is basically expand the same health care system–that everyone is now complaining about–to more people.  There is little sincere effort to reform Medicare.  Although a white paper claims that he would cut physician compensation in Medicare, Baucus unsurprisingly decided to raise Medicare physician payment rates.  Pledges to reduce ‘waste and fraud’ are uttered by every President and Congressman in recent history but this is difficult to accomplish.  What about the promise to “reward Medicare providers who deliver care more efficiently and penalize those who don’t.”  This is good in theory, but difficult in practice.  Can we adequately risk adjust to make up for the fact that some physicians have sicker populations?  Will physicians have an incentive to not treat the sickest patients in order to improve their bonuses from Medicare?

Other points

I am not in favor of an individual mandate.  Most people want insurance and will buy it if they can afford it.  Will the government really fine lower middle class individuals for not buying health insurance?  What if they are using their limited income towards shelter, food, or their children’s education?

The “free rider” problem is a serious problem and has been addressed nicely here.

The Health Insurance Exchange is an interesting idea.  On the one hand, standardizing health plans makes comparison shopping between insurers easier.  However, the standardization may hurt innovation in the health insurance industry.  Further, how will these standard evolve as new technologies are invented?  I would guess that these ‘standardized’ plans will be slower to cover newer technologies.

Taxing ‘cadillac’ insurance plans does not make sense to me.  Let us say that two people earn $50,000 per year.  One person decides to buy a fancy flat screen TV while the other buys a small TV and saves the rest.  Should we tax the person who likes TV more than the a non-TV loving person?  Similarly, some people will prefer to spend more money on comprehensive health insurance.  Others might forego a cadiallac plan and instead buy exercise equipment, organic food, cars or any other item.  A progressive tax to fund health insurance for poorer individuals makes sense.  Taxing those who want comprehensive health insurance does not.  In fact, Baucus is reconsidering the excise tax on high-end insurance plans.

Tags: , ,

Links

Monday Links:

Disclaimer: The director of the Holocaust Education Resource Center is (my mom!) Mrs. Bonnie Shafrin.

Tags:

What is Max Baucus proposing in his inital health reform bill?  Most of the principles are based on the Senate Finance Committee 2009 white paper.  Below 

  • Creation of a Health Insurance Exchange. Insurers participating in the exchange could would be precluded from discriminating based on pre-existing conditions.
  • Expand Medicaid to all individuals below 133% of the federal poverty line.
  • Expand SCHIP to cover all children in household below 250% of the federal poverty line in 2013.
  • Reduce Medicare Part D ‘donut hole’ so that enrollees in the donut hole range only pay 50% of drug costs rather than 100%.
  • Standardize benefits into 4 categories: bronze, silver, gold and platinum.  
  • Excise Tax: Levy a non‐deductible excise tax of 35% on insurance companies and plan administrators for any health insurance plan that is above the threshold of $8,000 for singles and $21,000 for family plans.  
  • Individual Mandate with tax subsidies.  Those with incomes between 133% and 300% of the FPL would be eligible for these subsidies.  Those who don’t get health insurance will be subject to a fine.
  • Employers who don’t provide health insurance must contribute to a fund to cover government insurance/subsidies for these individuals. Small employers with less than 50 employees are exempted from this requirement.
  • Small business subsidy.  Businesses with the fewest workers and the lowest wages would be offered a new tax credit to purchase health insurance for their employees.  The subsidy is up to 35% of the business’s contribution.  
  • $6 billion for co-ops.  This money would be used to fund the start-up costs and capital requirements for these co-ops.
  • Preventive Services: Eliminate Medicare copayment for preventive care.  Provide financial incentives to encourage Medicaid to cover preventive care services without copayments.
  • Do not cut Medicare physician payment according to the SGR.  Instead, increase Medicare physician compensation.
  • Malpractice reform. Allow states to develop alternatives to the current tort litigation system.

Ezra Klein also has a nice review of parts of the Baucus bill: Exchanges, Insurance Regulation, Affordability, Individual Mandate, Co-ops, Taxing Insurers.  Time magazine also has a FAQ on the Baucus bill.

Also see  the CBO and CBPP analysis of the plan.

Tags: ,

“A lot of people think government action saved capitalism. It didn’t. Capitalism saved capitalism.  

A lot of people think the government didn’t have any plans with regard to Lehman Brothers. It did. The plans just didn’t work.”

Tags:

Links

Some links for you to enjoy over the weekend.

Tags:

The Medicare Reimbursement series continues with a look at physician reimbursement in more detail. The source of this information is MedPAC’s Payment Basics.

Physician Reimbursement
Physicians payment is based on 3 factors: RVU, GPCI and the MEI conversion factor.

  • Relative value units (RVUs) measure the relative costliness of three types of resources used to provide different physician services: physician work, practice expenses, and expenses for physicians’ professional liability insurance (PLI). Each of these three components of the RVU payment is adjusted separately for geographic cost variation (see GPCI discussion below).
  • Geographic practice cost indexes (GPCI): Measures payments based on variation in the costs of providing services across 89 different geographical areas. Thirty four of these 89 geographical areas are state-wide. GPCI’s have a national average of 1.0. The law requires that the GPCIs be revised at least every three years.
    • Physician work GPCI: based on the earnings of professionals (lawyers, engineers, and others) reported in the decennial census
    • Practice expense GPCI: constructed to account for geographic differences in nonphysician staff wages (40% of the GPCI practice expense), office space costs (27% of the GPCI practice expense), and equipment and supplies (33% of the GPCI practice expense).
    • PLI GPCI: based on data CMS periodically collects from the largest malpractice insurers in each state
  • Medicare Economic Index (MEI): Changes in the input prices for physician services are measured using the Medicare Economic Index (MEI), a weighted measure of average national prices for inputs needed to produce physicians’ services.

Tags: ,

The latest edition of the Health Wonk Review is up at Healthcare Technology News.  This is a great source for commentary about Obama’s speech last week.

Tags:

The Medicare Reimbursement series continues with the big money payments: acute inpatient hospital care, long-term care facilities and critical access hospitals. The sources of this information is MedPAC’s Payment Basics.

Hospital Acute Inpatient Services

  • Payments made under the acute inpatient prospective payment system (IPPS) totaled $105 billion and accounted for about 25 percent of Medicare spending in 2006. These payments provide about 20 percent of hospitals’ overall revenues.
  • In 2008, beneficiaries are liable for a deductible of $1,024 for the first hospital stay in an episode, and daily copayments of $256 are imposed beginning on the 61st day.
  • Hospitals receive payment based on 2 factors: i) patient diagnosis and treatment and ii) hospital location. Each patient admission payment is based on Medicare severity diagnosis related groups (MS–DRGs), which is then adjusted by a geographic factor which measures labor costs in each local area.
  • Clinical conditions are defined by patients’ discharge diagnoses, including the principal diagnosis—the main problem requiring inpatient care—and up to eight secondary diagnoses indicating other conditions that were present at admission (co-morbidities) or developed during the hospital stay (complications). The treatment strategy—surgical or medical—is defined by the presence or absence of up to six procedures performed during the stay.
  • The MS-DRG is determined by the following factors:
    • Discharge base rates: Hospital are reimbursed a flat amount per discharge for the operating and capital costs that efficient facilities would be expected to incur in furnishing covered inpatient services.
    • MS–DRG relative weights: Medicare assigns a weight to each MS–DRG reflecting the average relative costliness of cases in that group compared with that for the average Medicare case.
    • New technology payments.
    • Wage Index: Medicare’s base operating and capital rates are adjusted by an area wage index to reflect the expected differences in local market prices for labor.
    • Bad Debts: Medicare reimburses acute-care hospitals for 70 percent of bad debts resulting from beneficiaries’ nonpayment of deductibles and copayments.
    • Indirect medical education: Teaching hospitals receive an additional payment.
    • Disproportionate share payments (DSH): Hospitals that treat a disproportionate share of low-income patients receive additional operating and capital payments .
    • Rural hospitals: Rural hospitals can receive extra money if they are a sole community hospital (SCH).
    • Outlier payments: These are additional payments for very costly patient cases.

Long Term Care Hospitals (LTCH)

  • Payments to LTCHs were about $4.5 billion in 2007; Medicare beneficiaries accounted for about 70 percent of these hospitals’ revenues. In 2006, almost 116,000 Medicare beneficiaries had 130,000 discharges from LTCHs, and 392 facilities were Medicare certified. In order to qualify for LTCH payment, hospitals must have an average length of patient stay longer than 25 days.
  • Beneficiaries transferred to an LTCH from an acute care hospital pay no additional deductible. However, beneficiaries admitted from the community are responsible for a deductible—$1,024 in 2008—as the first admission during a spell of illness, and for a copayment—$256 per day—for the 61st through 90th days.
  • Since October 2002, Medicare has paid LTCHs predetermined per discharge rates based primarily on the patient’s diagnosis and market area wages.
  • LTCH receive a flat per discharge rate to cover operating and capital costs. Payments for patient care as based on MS–LTC–DRGs, which are based on principal diagnosis, up to eight secondary diagnoses, up to six procedures performed, age, sex, and discharge status.
  • Short-stay and high-cost outliers receive altered payment rates.
  • The 25 percent rule reduces payments for LTCHs that exceed established percentage thresholds for patients admitted from certain referring hospitals during a cost-reporting period.
  • There is no mechanism in law for updating payments to LTCHs. CMS intends to update LTCH PPS payment rates based on the most recent estimate of the Rehabilitation, Psychiatric, and Long-Term Care (RPL) market basket index (which measures the price increases of goods and services inpatient rehabilitation facilities, inpatient psychiatric facilities, and LTCHs buy to produce patient care).

Critical Access Hospitals (CAH)

  • CAHs are limited to 25 beds and primarily operate in rural areas. Unlike traditional hospitals (which are paid under prospective payment systems), Medicare pays CAHs based on 101 percent of each hospital’s reported costs.
  • To qualify for the CAH program, a hospital had to be at least 15 miles by secondary road and 35 miles by primary road from the nearest hospital or be declared a “necessary provider” by the state. However, the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act of 2003 eliminated states’ ability to declare additional hospitals “necessary providers” starting in January 2006.
  • Medicare’s cost-based payments to CAHs were roughly $6 billion in 2006, representing 4 percent of all Medicare inpatient and outpatient payments to hospitals.
  • Most rural hospitals are either CAHs (56 percent), sole community hospitals (SCHs) (18 percent), or Medicare-dependent hospitals (MDHs) (6 percent). CHs receive the higher of either (a) standard inpatient prospective payment rates or (b) payments based on the hospital’s costs in a base year updated to the current year and adjusted for changes in their case mix. MDHs are similar to SCHs, but they are eligible for a prospective payment rate based on a blend of current PPS rates (25 percent) and their historical costs (75 percent).
  • There are two main differences between CAH and other forms of rural hospitals. First, CAH receive cost-based payment for inpatient and outpatient care, but SCH and MDH receive cost based payment only for inpatient care. Second, SCHs’ and MDHs’ payments are based on historical costs trended forward.

Ambulatory Surgical Centers

  • Payments to ASCs were $2.9 billion in 2007, including both program and beneficiary spending.
  • In January 2008, Medicare began paying for surgery-related facility services provided in ASCs using a payment system based on the hospital outpatient prospective payment system (OPPS). In contrast to the old ASC payment system, which had only nine procedure groups, the new ASC system has several hundred procedure groups. The unit of payment in the ASC payment system is the individual surgical procedure.
  • In 2008, CMS substantially expanded the list of services that qualify for facility payment in ASCs. Medicare began paying for all procedures that do not pose a significant safety risk when performed in an ASC and do not require an overnight stay.
  • The 2008 ASC conversion factor is 65 percent of the OPPS conversion factor ($41.40). The ASC rates are less than the OPPS rates because of the budget neutrality requirement.
  • To account for geographic differences in input prices, CMS adjusts the labor portion of the ASC rate (50 percent) by the hospital wage index. CMS does not adjust the non-labor portion (the remaining 50 percent).
  • CMS updates the ASC relative weights annually based on changes to the OPPS weights and the physician fee schedule practice expense amounts.

Tags: ,

Ben Bernanke declared today that “From a technical perspective, the recession is very likely over at this point.” What has made him make this declaration.

If he using the stockmarket as an indication, the recession may be over. Stocks are still down 30% from the beginning of the year in 2008. However, the S&P 500 is up about 50% since the beginning of the year. Thus, according to the stock market, the recession may be over. However, unemployment is at 9.6%. Further, economists predict that unemployment will reach 10% by the end of the year.

Economic growth may be on the rise, but changes in employment levels historically have lagged behind changes in overall economic production. Economic activity may be growing, but unemployment will likely remain high for the near-term future.

Then again–as recent history has shown us–economists are not good at predicting the future. Instead, you should just take from this post that nobody knows what will happen next.

Tags: , ,

The Scotland Sun reports that the Scottish NHS paid £23 million ($40 million) to patients for subpar care. Is this due to the inherently substandard quality of care in a single-payer system?

The answer is likely no. This figure only amounts to about £4.50 ($7.34) for every person in Scotland however. Drug-related errors in the U.S. cost patients $3.5 billion per year or $11.50 per patient. Thus, it matters not whether a health care system is single payer or not; single-payer and private health care systems both have significant room for improvement.

Tags: , , ,

« Older entries § Newer entries »