Hospitals must now post on their websites, in a consumer-friendly format, the specific costs for 300 common and "shoppable" services, such as having a baby, getting a joint replacement, having a hernia repaired or undergoing a diagnostic brain scan. FS Productions/Tetra images RF/Getty Images hide caption
Hospitals must now post on their websites, in a consumer-friendly format, the specific costs for 300 common and "shoppable" services, such as having a baby, getting a joint replacement, having a hernia repaired or undergoing a diagnostic brain scan.
Hospitals are facing the new year with new requirements to post price information they have long sought to obscure: the actual prices they negotiate with insurers and the discounts they offer their cash-paying customers.
The move is part of a larger push by the Trump administration to use price transparency to curtail prices and create better-informed consumers. Yet there is disagreement on whether posting the prices for hospital services and procedures will actually achieve that goal.
As of Jan. 1, the facilities must post on their websites prices for every service, drug and supply they provide. Next year, under a separate rule, health insurers must take similar steps. A related effort to force drugmakers to list their prices in advertisements was struck down by the courts.
With the new hospital rule, consumers should be able to see the tremendous variation in prices for the exact same care among hospitals and get an estimate of what they will be charged for care before they seek it.
The new data requirements go well beyond the previous rule of requiring hospitals to post their "chargemasters" the hospital-generated list prices that bear little relation to what it costs a hospital to provide care. Also, few consumers or insurers actually pay those listed prices.
Instead, under the new rule put forward by the Trump administration, "these are the real prices in health care," says Cynthia Fisher, founder and chairman of Patient Rights Advocate, a group that promotes price transparency.
Here's what consumers should know:
How will this work?
Each hospital must post publicly online and in a machine-readable format that is easy to process by computers several prices for every item and service they provide: gross charges; the actual, and most likely far lower, prices they've negotiated with insurers, including de-identified minimum and maximum negotiated charges; and the cash price they offer patients who are uninsured or not using their insurance.
In addition, each hospital must also post, in a "consumer-friendly format," the specific costs for 300 common and "shoppable" services, such as having a baby, getting a joint replacement, having a hernia repaired or undergoing a diagnostic brain scan.
Those 300 bundles of procedures and services must total all costs involved from the hardware used to the operating room time, to drugs given and the fees of hospital-employed physicians so patients won't have to attempt the nearly impossible job of figuring it out themselves.
Hospitals can mostly select which services fall into this category, although the federal government has dictated 70 that must be listed including certain surgeries, diagnostic tests, imaging scans, new patient visits and psychotherapy sessions.
Will prices be exact?
No. At best, these are ballpark figures.
Other factors influence consumers' costs, like the type of insurance plan a patient has, the size and remaining amount of the annual deductible on their health plan, and the complexity of their medical problem.
An estimate on a surgery, for example, might prove inexact. If all goes as expected, the price quoted likely will be close. But unexpected complications could arise, adding to the cost.
"You'll get the average price, but you are not average," says Gerard Anderson, a professor of health policy and management at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health who studies hospital pricing.
Tools to help consumers determine in advance the amount of deductible they'll owe are already available from many insurers. And experts expect the additional information being made available this month will prompt entrepreneurs to create their own apps or services to help consumers analyze the price data.
For now, though, the hospital requirements are a worthy start, say specialists in U.S. health care costs.
"It's very good news for consumers," said George Nation, a professor of law and business at Lehigh University who studies hospital pricing. "Individuals will be able to get price information, although how much they are going to use it will remain to be seen."
Who else will use this information?
Zack Cooper, an associate professor of public health and economics at Yale, doubts that the data alone will make much of a difference for most consumers.
"It's not likely that my neighbor or me, for that matter will go on and look at prices and, therefore, dramatically change decisions about where to get care," Cooper says.
Some cost information is already made available by insurers to their enrollees, particularly out-of-pocket costs for elective services, "but most people don't consult it," he says.
That could be because many consumers carry types of insurance in which they pay flat-dollar copayments for such things as doctor visits, drugs or hospital stays payments that have no correlation to the underlying charges.
Still, the information may be of great interest to the uninsured and to the increasing number of Americans with high-deductible plans, in which they are responsible for hundreds or even thousands of dollars in costs annually before the insurer begins picking up the bulk of the cost.
For them, the negotiated rate and cash discount information may prove more useful, Nation says.
"If I have a $10,000 deductible plan and it's December and I'm not close to meeting that, I may go to a hospital and try to get the cash price," Nation says.
Employers, however, may have a keen interest in the new data, says James Gelfand, senior vice president at the ERISA Industry Committee, which lobbies on behalf of large employers that offer health insurance to their workers. Employers will want to know how much they are paying each hospital compared with others in the area and how well their insurers stack up in negotiating rates, Gelfand says.
For some employers, he says, it could be eye-opening to see how hospitals cross-subsidize by charging exorbitant amounts for some things and minimal amounts for others.
"The rule puts that all into the light," says Gelfand. "When an employer sees these ridiculous prices, for the first time they will have the ability to say no." That could mean rejecting specific prices or the hospital entirely.
Typically, employers can't or won't limit workers' choices by outright cutting a hospital from an insurance network. More likely, they may use the information to create financial incentives to use the lowest-cost facilities, says Anderson at Johns Hopkins.
"If I'm an employer," he says, "I'll look at three hospitals in my area and say, 'I'll pay the price for the lowest one. If you want to go to one of the other two, you can pay the difference.' "
Will price transparency reduce overall health spending?
Revealing actual negotiated prices, as this rule requires, may push the more expensive hospitals in an area to reduce prices in their future bargaining talks with insurers or employers, potentially lowering health spending in those regions.
It could also go the other way, with lower-cost hospitals demanding a raise, driving up spending.
Bottom line: Price transparency can help, but the market power of the various players might matter more.
In some places, where there may be one dominant hospital, even employers "who know they are getting ripped off" may not feel they can cut out a big, brand-name facility from their networks, no matter the price, Anderson says.
Is the rule change a done deal?
The hospital industry went to court, arguing that parts of the rule go too far, violating their First Amendment rights and also unfairly forcing hospitals to disclose trade secrets. That information, the industry says, can then be used against them in negotiations with insurers and employers.
But the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia disagreed with the hospitals and upheld the rule, prompting an appeal by the industry. On Dec. 29, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia affirmed that lower court decision and did not move to block enforcement of the rule.
In a written statement last week, the American Hospital Association's general counsel cited "disappointment" with the ruling, and said the organization is "reviewing the decision carefully to determine next steps."
Apart from the litigation, the AHA says it plans to talk with the incoming Biden administration "to try to persuade them there are some elements to this rule and the insurer rule that are tricky," says Tom Nickels, an executive vice president of the trade group. "We want to be of help to consumers, but is it really in people's best interest to provide privately negotiated rates?"
Fisher thinks so: "Hospitals are fighting this because they want to keep their negotiated deals with insurers secret," she says. "What these rules do is give the American consumer the power of being informed."
Kaiser Health News is a nonprofit, editorially independent program of the Kaiser Family Foundation and is not affiliated with Kaiser Permanente.
- Trump Impeachment Trial And The 1st Amendment Debate : Trump Impeachment Trial: Live Updates - NPR - February 14th, 2021
- Trumps claim impeachment violates the 1st Amendment and Brandenburg v. Ohio, explained - Vox.com - February 14th, 2021
- WATCH: Trump not protected by First Amendment for inciting insurrection, Rep. Raskin says - PBS NewsHour - February 14th, 2021
- The Insurrection, Police Accountability, and the First Amendment - brennancenter.org - February 14th, 2021
- Opinion: Guns shouldn't trump the First Amendment - The Missouri Times - February 14th, 2021
- Comment: Trump's lawyers have it wrong on First Amendment, too | HeraldNet.com - The Daily Herald - February 14th, 2021
- Highlights of Day 4 of the Trump Impeachment Trial - The New York Times - February 14th, 2021
- The Atlantic The Great Free-Speech Reversal - The Atlantic - January 29th, 2021
- First Ammendment Rights What Is the First Ammendment? - Reader's Digest - January 29th, 2021
- [OPINION] Does the First Amendment apply to what you post on social media? - Asian Journal News - January 29th, 2021
- Amanda Gorman's lyrical promise of the First Amendment - Hopkinsville Kentucky New Era - January 29th, 2021
- Oh, so you really want me to talk about the First Amendment, eh? (JEFF EDELSTEIN COLUMN) - The Trentonian - January 29th, 2021
- Other View: First Amendment doesn't apply to Twitter, Facebook - Duluth News Tribune - January 29th, 2021
- Let's clear up needless confusion about the First Amendment - Oskaloosa Herald - January 29th, 2021
- Letter: Inauguration, and the First Amendment | Letters to the Editor | tucson.com - Arizona Daily Star - January 29th, 2021
- Might Federal Preemption of Speech-Protective State Laws Violate the First Amendment? - Reason - January 29th, 2021
- The Buckeye Institute Files First Amendment Case on Behalf of Ohio Guidance Counselor - Buckeye Institute - January 29th, 2021
- The First Amendment won't save Trump - Salon - January 29th, 2021
- Absolute Freedom to Tweet? Employers (and the NLRA) May Have Something to Say About It - JD Supra - January 29th, 2021
- I'm a First Amendment scholar and I think Big Tech should be left alone - The Conversation US - January 23rd, 2021
- Letter to the editor: Put the First Amendment first - Daily Mississippian - January 23rd, 2021
- Napolitano: Does the First Amendment restrain Big Tech? - Daily Herald - January 23rd, 2021
- Do Critics of Police Have the First Amendment Procedural Protections That Nazis Get? - Reason - January 23rd, 2021
- Ask the expert: The First Amendment and free speech - MSUToday - January 23rd, 2021
- Letter: To everyone, including friends and family members, who feel First Amendment rights are being denied - Sumter Item - January 23rd, 2021
- Knight Institute Urges Supreme Court To Preserve Ruling That Trump Violated First Amendment 01/25/2021 - MediaPost Communications - January 23rd, 2021
- Do Social Media Companies Have Too Much Power Over The First Amendment? - WFAE - January 23rd, 2021
- What the First Amendment Really Says About Whether Trump Incited the Capitol Riot - Slate - January 23rd, 2021
- Ask the Lawyer: There is no First Amendment right to social media use - The Oakland Press - January 23rd, 2021
- Permit Requirements for Filming in National Parks Violate First Amendment - Reason - January 23rd, 2021
- Does the First Amendment protect you on social media? - RADIO.COM - January 23rd, 2021
- Simpson sues Board of Elections, claims dismissal violated First Amendment rights - Greensboro News & Record - January 23rd, 2021
- What does the day after Section 230 reform look like? - Brookings Institution - January 23rd, 2021
- Twitter and Facebook Just Proved That Deplatforming Works - The Nation - January 23rd, 2021
- Afternoon Briefs: SCOTUS will consider cheerleader's First Amendment case; former AG dies at 88 - ABA Journal - January 5th, 2021
- No Blanket Protection for Internet Platforms - The Wall Street Journal - January 5th, 2021
- Walsh Vetoes Ordinance That Would Restrict Police Use Of Tear Gas, Rubber Bullets - WBUR - January 5th, 2021
- Happy new and old year: 2020 just won't go away when it comes to first amendment issues in 2021 - Hopkinsville Kentucky New Era - January 5th, 2021
- Far-Right VA State Senator Claims huge victory for the First Amendment and for open access to government for all Virginians. Except That the Court... - January 5th, 2021
- "I am asking Washingtonians and those who live in the region to stay out of the downtown area on Tuesday and Wednesday and not to engage with... - January 5th, 2021
- Julian Assange Extradition to U.S. Blocked Over Mental Health Concerns - The New York Times - January 5th, 2021
- The First Amendment is under siege and most Americans know it - The Central New York Business Journal - December 30th, 2020
- First Circuit Creates Exception To Massachusetts Wiretap Statute Based On First Amendment Rights, Allows Citizens And Press To Record Police Activity... - December 30th, 2020
- First Circuit Appeals Court Reaffirms Its 2011 Decision: The First Amendment Protects The Recording Of Cops - Techdirt - December 30th, 2020
- New Year's Eve In The Year Of The Coronavirus - The Rhino Times of Greensboro - The Rhino TImes - December 30th, 2020
- On Religion: COVID was year's top religion story. But which story? - Tahlequah Daily Press - December 30th, 2020
- How Lin Wood Became a Pro-Trump Conspiracy Theorist - The New York Times - December 30th, 2020
- The Year That Changed the Internet - The Atlantic - December 30th, 2020
- Section 230 Isn't A Subsidy; It's A Rule Of Civil Procedure - Techdirt - December 30th, 2020
- 7 Recommendations for the New Year - Contracting Business - December 30th, 2020
- Smith: Small steps to bring hope and wonder - The Register-Guard - December 30th, 2020
- Court Enjoins Enforcement of Combatting Race and Sex Stereotyping Executive Order for Federal Contractors and Grantees - JD Supra - December 30th, 2020
- COOMBES: Put the First Amendment first - University of Virginia The Cavalier Daily - October 12th, 2020
- Did the First Amendment to the Constitution lay the foundation for an authoritarian state? - The Indian Express - October 12th, 2020
- First Amendment Right to Record Child-Protection Visit to Your Home - Reason - October 12th, 2020
- First Amendment scholars weigh in on legality of Terminal Tower Biden Harris light display - cleveland.com - October 12th, 2020
- Use of Trademarks in Creative Works & Lanham Act Liability - The National Law Review - October 12th, 2020
- 'Introduction to the First Amendment Museum' topic of presentation - Kennebec Journal & Morning Sentinel - October 12th, 2020
- Judge amy coney barrett and the First Amendment - Lexology - October 12th, 2020
- A vote for Trump is a vote against the First Amendment - Poughkeepsie Journal - October 12th, 2020
- Trump Admin. Says First Amendment Is Moot In WeChat Case - Law360 - October 12th, 2020
- You Shouldn't Get Sued for Petitioning the Government - Cato Institute - October 12th, 2020
- Reporters Committee welcomes Inasmuch Foundation Legal Fellow - Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press - October 12th, 2020
- FIRST 5: Trump and COVID-19 -- How 'free' are/should we be? - Salina Post - October 12th, 2020
- Candidates and voters alike suffer as yard signs are targeted for theft and vandalism - Burlington Hawk Eye - October 12th, 2020
- Letters to the Editor: The First Amendment in Rio Rancho - Albuquerque Journal - September 21st, 2020
- Texas A&M University Introduces First Amendment Website - Texas A&M University Today - September 21st, 2020
- Attorney on first amendment rights of protesters: The government must protect these rights - RochesterFirst - September 21st, 2020
- Polk County GOP chairperson gathering signatures in support of a Second Amendment Designated County - Grand Forks Herald - September 21st, 2020
- Health officials urge people who attended Trump rally on Saturday to get tested for coronavirus - The Fayetteville Observer - September 21st, 2020
- Potsdam 'toilet gardens' will stay, for now, as federal judge grants injunction in toilet case - NNY360 - September 21st, 2020
- This Week at The Ninth: Informational Injury and Union Dues - JD Supra - September 21st, 2020
- Even with a Recent Lag, Special Interest PACs Enjoy Big Fundraising Edge Over Parties - InsiderNJ - September 21st, 2020
- Readers respond: Racists coming out of the woodwork - oregonlive.com - September 21st, 2020
- WeChat and TikTok Sanctions Not to Came Into Effect Yesterday - JD Supra - September 21st, 2020
- The Oklahoma Meat Consumer Protection Act is Meat Lobby's Response to the Increased Consumer Demand for Plant-Based Options - vegconomist - the vegan... - September 21st, 2020
- Army esports team denies accusations of violating First Amendment, offering fake giveaways - ArmyTimes.com - July 21st, 2020
- FIRST FIVE: Fighting over the meaning of First Amendment freedoms - hays Post - July 21st, 2020
- My View: In Provincetown, strange views of the First Amendment - Wicked Local Provincetown - July 21st, 2020
- John Bolton Gambles That Constitution Will Save Profits on Book That Was Embarrassing to the President - Law & Crime - July 21st, 2020