Wang Yang, Xu Jianhui, Anderson Gerard
Department of Health Policy and Management, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland.
Department of International Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland.
JAMA Netw Open. 2024 Dec 2;7(12):e2451941. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.51941.
Commercial prices for hospital care are high and vary widely in the US. Employers and state policymakers are exploring reference-based pricing (RBP) to set their payment rates as multiples of Medicare prices; understanding the range of commercial price variation within a hospital is important for calculating the appropriate price targets that are effectively low to generate savings but also feasible and viable to local hospital markets.
To examine within-hospital maximum-to-minimum commercial hospital price gaps negotiated by 5 national insurers and estimate plan savings if the minimum prices within each hospital are used as new payment level.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This cross-sectional study used the insurer-disclosed Transparency in Coverage data as of March 2024. There were 40 382 commercial hospital facility prices extracted for 10 common services negotiated by CVS Health, Elevance Health, Blue Cross Blue Shield, Cigna, and United Healthcare, measured at the hospital-service-insurer level relative to the 2024 Medicare prices. For each hospital-service pair, the minimum, enrollment-weighted mean, and maximum prices were calculated, as well as the maximum-to-minimum price gaps. Plan savings were then estimated using the minimum within-hospital prices as the new payment levels.
Insurer price disclosure under federal Transparency in Coverage rule.
Maximum-to-minimum commercial price gaps and estimated savings if using the minimum prices at hospital-service level.
Among 40 382 commercial hospital prices negotiated by 5 national insurers, the national means of minimum prices were 168% (95% CI, 167%-169%) of Medicare rates for inpatient services and 220% (95% CI, 215%-226%) of Medicare rates for outpatient services. National mean minimum-to-maximum price gaps were 86% (95% CI, 85%-87%) and 222% (95% CI, 215%-229%) of Medicare rates for inpatient and outpatient services, respectively. If using the minimum within-hospital prices, compared with current prices, payers could save 21% (95% CI, 20%-21%) for inpatient services and 29% (95% CI, 28%-30%) for outpatient services.
In this cross-sectional study, commercial prices across different national insurers varied substantially for the same hospital and service. These results suggest that employers and policymakers interested in RBP benchmarking may use the lowest prices among major insurers in their local hospital market as references to negotiate lower prices.
在美国,医院护理的商业价格高昂且差异很大。雇主和州政策制定者正在探索基于参考的定价(RBP),将他们的支付费率设定为医疗保险价格的倍数;了解医院内部商业价格变化范围对于计算合适的价格目标很重要,这些目标既要低到足以产生节省,又要对当地医院市场可行且可持续。
研究5家全国性保险公司协商的医院内部商业医院价格的最高值与最低值之间的差距,并估计如果将每家医院的最低价格用作新的支付水平,计划能节省多少费用。
设计、背景和参与者:这项横断面研究使用了截至2024年3月保险公司披露的医保覆盖透明度数据。提取了CVS Health、Elevance Health、蓝十字蓝盾、信诺和联合健康保险公司就10项常见服务协商的40382个商业医院设施价格,在医院 - 服务 - 保险公司层面相对于2024年医疗保险价格进行衡量。对于每对医院 - 服务组合,计算了最低价格、参保加权平均价格和最高价格,以及最高价格与最低价格之间的差距。然后使用医院内部的最低价格作为新的支付水平来估计计划节省的费用。
根据联邦医保覆盖透明度规则披露的保险公司价格。
最高价格与最低价格之间的商业价格差距,以及如果在医院 - 服务层面使用最低价格估计的节省费用。
在5家全国性保险公司协商的40382个商业医院价格中,住院服务的全国最低价格平均为医疗保险费率的168%(95%置信区间,167% - 169%),门诊服务为医疗保险费率的220%(95%置信区间,215% - 226%)。住院和门诊服务的全国最低价格与最高价格之间的平均差距分别为医疗保险费率的86%(95%置信区间,85% - 87%)和222%(95%置信区间,215% - 229%)。如果使用医院内部的最低价格,与当前价格相比,支付方住院服务可节省21%(95%置信区间,20% - 21%),门诊服务可节省29%(95%置信区间,28% - 30%)。
在这项横断面研究中,对于同一家医院和服务,不同全国性保险公司的商业价格差异很大。这些结果表明,对基于参考定价进行基准评估感兴趣的雇主和政策制定者可以将当地医院市场主要保险公司中的最低价格用作参考,以协商更低的价格。