Transparency in Coverage Data and Variation in Prices for Common Health Care Services.

This cross-sectional study describes the health care prices publicly posted by Humana and the price variations by geography, service, and other factors.

Provider Charges And State Surprise Billing Laws: Evidence From New York And California.

Surprise billing laws that allow dispute arbitration relying on provider charges may incentivize out-of-network providers to increase their charges to increase upcoming or future out-of-network payments. Although the federal No Surprises Act forbids arbitrators from considering charges during payment disputes over surprise bills covered by the act, states with existing laws can continue to use the specified state laws, which may allow the consideration of charges. This analysis examined provider charges in two such states, using claims data to compare trends in billed charges for out-of-network care during surprise bill scenarios involving nonemergency inpatient hospitalizations. The analysis considered New York, where state law uses arbitration tied to charges; California, where state law uses a payment standard rather than charges; and a comparison group of states without a law regarding surprise billing. We estimated that provider out-of-network charges for the nonemergency out-of-network bills we studied increased by $1,157 (24 percent) in New York after the passage of New York's surprise billing law and decreased by $752 (25 percent) in California compared to states without surprise billing laws. Assistant surgeons and surgical assistants had a large increase in charges in New York from before to after the law's passage, which may have driven the overall increase in charges.

Emergency Physicians Recover A Higher Share Of Charges From Out-Of-Network Care Than From In-Network Care.

Surprise medical bills occur when a patient unexpectedly or involuntarily receives care from an out-of-network provider and is billed for the amount not covered by insurance. Past studies were unable to observe whether bills for such care were sent to patients and, if so, how much patients paid directly to out-of-network providers. We used data from the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey to measure how much privately insured emergency patients paid when they likely received a surprise bill and how much physicians received in these situations. Physicians collected 65 percent of the charged amount for likely surprise bills compared with 52 percent for other cases. Patients who likely received a surprise out-of-network bill for emergency care paid physicians more than ten times as much as other emergency patients paid, on average.

Arbitration Over Out-Of-Network Medical Bills: Evidence From New Jersey Payment Disputes.

In 2018 New Jersey implemented a final-offer arbitration system to resolve payment disputes between insurers and out-of-network providers over surprise medical bills. Similar proposals are being considered by Congress and other states. In this article we examine how arbitration decisions compare with other relevant provider payment amounts by linking administrative data from New Jersey arbitration cases to Medicare and commercial insurance claims data. We find that decisions track closely with one of the metrics that arbitrators are shown-the eightieth percentile of provider charges-with the median decision being 5.7 times prevailing in-network rates for the same services. It is not a foregone conclusion that arbitrators will select winning offers based on proximity to this target, although our findings suggest that it is a strong anchor. The amount that providers can expect to receive through the arbitration process also affects their bargaining leverage with insurers, which could affect in-network negotiated rates more broadly. Therefore, basing arbitration decisions or a payment standard on unilaterally set provider-billed charges appears likely to increase health care costs relative to other surprise billing solutions and perversely incentivizes providers to inflate their charges over time.