OP-ED

Could Price Be Right?

If confirmed as Secretary of HHS, Tom Price will oversee a $1 trillion budget – roughly one-third of all health expenditures.  His proposed legislation “Empowering Patients First” seeks to control costs by giving patients more choices and providing the information required to make them. He calls for publicly available standardized information on the price and quality of physicians, hospitals and other health care institutions.

It sounds like Dr. Price is prescribing a single data system. 

Medicare has had a single data system on the over-65 population for decades.  Since 2005, these data have informed Hospital Compare, a consumer oriented website comparing the quality of over 4000 hospitals.  And while prices in Medicare are relatively fixed, these same data have shown substantial variation in costs because the quantity of service – the number of hospital admissions, procedures and physician visits – varies substantially from place to place.

But Medicare is only one piece of the data puzzle.  A National Bureau of Economic Research report[nber.org] added another piece last year with data from large insurance companies like Aetna and United.  For the under-65 commercially insured population, it’s not just the quantity of services that are all over the map – it’s also the prices. 

We all have an interest in a sustainable health care system: one that provides high quality, needed care at a cost that doesn’t bankrupt public budgets – or worse, individual patients.  We need to learn from those communities that have found the right balance.  Rochester NY, for example, is among the least expensive health care markets in the country, for both Medicare and commercial patients.

But the only reason we know this is because a few insurers have been willing to share some of their data with researchers.

Unfortunately, much health information is still hidden from view – behind a proprietary curtain of privately held data. We rarely get to peek under that curtain, as researchers did last year.   Mind you, it took a heroic effort and still they were only able to look at less than a third of the private insurance market.  More than two-thirds remains a black box. 

That’s no way to run a railroad.  You want patient choice to encourage a better health care system in the future? Then the first step is for them to know what’s going on out there right now.  We need a single data system.

A single data system would make both price and quantity more transparent.  That alone might have the desired effect of dampening some of the price/quantity extremes.  It could also save billions in administrative costs by moving to a single uniform insurance claim. Furthermore, it would provide the opportunity to explore who is delivering great care at low cost – both to help consumers make choices and all of us learn how to improve the system. 

And a single data system is important for more than just saving money.  It’s important for the quality of clinical care.  Right now it’s hard to know what happens when a new drug, new procedure, or new device is introduced into the system.  No one can see the complete picture since different patients have different insurers. Then patients change employers and get a new insurer or they don’t change employers, but their employer changes insurers.  Or their insurance company merges with another one.

It’s a mess.  It’s a system that not only can’t monitor costs – it can’t monitor safety, something every orthopedic surgeon, including Dr. Price, cares deeply about.  The United States has probably implanted more metal on metal hip replacements than any other country in the world.  But we can’t say for sure, since we don’t have a single data system.  But we can say one thing for sure: we didn’t learn that metal-on-metal hips are much more likely to fail from US data, we had to import that knowledge from the United Kingdom – a country with a single data system. 

Dr. Price’s legislation envisions state-based portals for consumers to get information.  But why make 50 states build 50 different data systems? Patients move across state lines; they might appreciate one stop shopping. More importantly, so do insurers.  Four insurance companies – Blue Cross, Anthem, United and Aetna – now comprise of three-quarters of the national private insurance market.  That they would prefer a single uniform reporting requirement over 50 disparate requirements would seem to be a safe bet. 

We hope Dr. Price does the right thing: construct a single data system – so we can all know how our health care system does, and doesn’t, work.  

Dr. Welch is professor of medicine at the Geisel School of Medicine and author of “Less Medicine, More Health”.  Dr. Fisher is the Director of the Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy and Clinical Practice.

Livongo’s Post Ad Banner 728*90

10
Leave a Reply

9 Comment threads
1 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
9 Comment authors
pjnelsonAllanPetermeltootsjamesepurcell Recent comment authors
newest oldest most voted
pjnelson
Member
pjnelson

By the way, “a single uniform insurance claim” already exists and has existed for many years. The level of administrative inefficiency is small. As a Primary Physician for 40+ years, my receivable days ‘including patient payments’ for the last 5 years varied from 27 to 30 days because of the electronic claims process, honestly. And, the financial payment was posted directly to my corporate checking account by all institutional payers. An EOB was sent to our business office by Email from each payer. Defining the diagnostic label is quite another factor. Last year, the payer process (mandated by Congress) changed… Read more »

pjnelson
Member
pjnelson

Historically, our national economy has a recession every 10 years. We are now 8 years into the current economic cycle. My perception of our healthcare industry suspects that a few major health systems are marginally stable and occasionally borrow funds for pay-roll to sustain their cash flow. My essential concern is that their lender also may be marginally unstable as in, the level of their capital reserves. With a recession, they may be suddenly forced to “call their short-term loans.” Just as suddenly, one or more health systems would close because our nation’s health care demands always diminish during a… Read more »

Peter
Member
Peter

“We hope Dr. Price does the right thing:’

Is anybody in this regime going to do the “right” thing? Isn’t “imposing” a single data system what Repugnacans hate from big government?

Allan
Member
Allan

Such an open mind.

meltoots
Member
meltoots

Anthem is Blue Cross, oops do you actually look at your EOBs, understand billing? United you mean United Healthcare? This is yet another unrealistic idea. There are MANY forces that would never let this happen. Ever. First being a lack of understanding of how healthcare is delivered by the authors (besides the Anthem/Blue Cross mistake). The system is going to fail and when it does, that is the ONLY time it will be ready for a fix. MACRA may push us over, but most will take penalties. 96% serious concern about MD burnout in NEJM is a big red flag,… Read more »

jamesepurcell
Member

It’s probably my ignorance, of which there is much, but I don’t understand what a single data system might be. As usual, God is in the details. Are we looking to get a clear look (transparent) into price, quality, and outcomes? Is the only way to do this is to have a uniform set of definitionals etc.? It sounds like an enormous federal project with potentially far reaching consequences. The first step may be simply to require price transparency. Should that be via state or federal statute? I’d probably opt for state so that there can be the federalist experimentation… Read more »

William Palmer MD
Member
William Palmer MD

UCSF had an hour long grand rounds on this very problem: how can we get everyone in health care to use the same language?…specifically, as a for-instance, “what is hypertension”. They were also thinking that uniform international definitions would be nice too. As I recall, the discussants rather gave up. Too many variables. Ages. Races. Genetics. Ambulatory vs non-ambulatory. Cultures who ate salt, for example. Occupation and background level of cortisol and stress. Too many instruments measuring blood pressure. Too much changing reasearch as to what is beneficial blood pressure compared to what is statistically normal for a population. “If… Read more »

Margalit Gur-Arie
Member

Well, yes, this is a very nice research project, although if I may add, the Health Affairs reference is very old and most likely no longer accurate. We do have one common claim form and one common electronic standard for all the things mentioned there. We also have more than four insurance companies, and Blue Cross is not one insurer. Claim processing rules are complex and vary because that’s how insurers make more money. I would also be interested in calculating how much this standardization is going to cost taxpayers, insurers, clearinghouses, hospitals, doctors, and all other facilities, because those… Read more »

BobbyGvegas
Member

“Single data system” wold be fine. I’ve been arguing for that for years. I’ve called long and loud for a “standard data dictionary” as part of ONC EHR certification. If “data are the lifeblood of health care,” they should be “Type-O blood.”

But, the GOP Ayn Ryan wing’s larger and priority goal is to turn all “entitlement” programs into means-tested spend-down-to-poverty programs (with a lovely side dish of outlawing women’s reproductive rights while they’re at it — Price himself is one of those “Personhood-at-Conception” zealots). http://regionalextensioncenter.blogspot.com/2016/12/the-price-is-right-wing-that-is.html

fsgoldstein
Member

Drs. Welch and Fisher, thanks for discussing a single data system, I believe that perhaps now the time has come and hope your article leads down this path. In 2006 I wrote about it as well, essentially recommending that we establish a “Manhattan Project”. Here is an excerpt: “Imagine the possibilities A major component of this effort should be the funding and development of a National Health Care Informatics Center similar to the Lawrence Labs. This information center should house a supercomputer with a database of all patient records in the U.S., including claims, laboratory results, medical records and other… Read more »