Self-pay markets in health care: consumer Nirvana or caveat emptor?

As consumers face more incentives to make cost-conscious medical care decisions, some policymakers cite self-pay markets as models for consumer shopping. An analysis of the LASIK market revealed limited shopping overall, despite the fact that patients pay the full cost. For other self-pay procedures, consumers shop even less, for reasons ranging from urgency, to costs of obtaining price quotes, to quality concerns that prompt many consumers to rely on word-of-mouth recommendations. Given that consumer shopping is not prevalent in most self-pay markets, we expect the extent of shopping to be even more limited for many services covered by insurance.

Hospital-physicians relations: cooperation, competition, or separation?

Because many services performed in hospitals can safely and conveniently be performed in ambulatory settings, physicians have become owners of entities directly competing with hospitals for patients in a new medical arms race. Hospitals and medical staff physicians face growing tensions as a result of physicians' growing reluctance to take emergency department call and the consequences of hospitalists replacing physicians in the care of inpatients. Although there are increasing expectations that health system challenges will lead hospitals and physicians to collaborate, in many markets the willingness and ability for hospitals and physicians to work together is actually eroding.

Hospitals' responses to nurse staffing shortages.

Hospitals have used a mix of short-term and long-term strategies to deal with nurse shortages, particularly efforts emphasizing nurse education, competitive compensation, and temporary staff. Interviews with health care leaders from Round Five of the Community Tracking Study indicate that these activities, in conjunction with other factors, have assisted in reducing shortages of hospital nurses. However, hospitals' actions have increased costs and raised concerns about their potential impact on patient care. Additionally, a large degree of doubt exists among hospitals about their ability to meet future nursing needs.

The transition from excess capacity to strained capacity in U.S. hospitals.

After many years of concern about excess hospital capacity, a growing perception exists that the capacity of some hospitals now seems constrained. This article explores the reasons behind this changing perception, looking at the longitudinal data and in-depth interviews for hospitals in four study sites monitored by the Community Tracking Study of the Center for Studying Health System Change. Notwithstanding the differences for individual hospitals, we observed that adjustments to the supply of hospital services tend to be slow and out of sync with changes in the demand for hospital services. Those hospitals reporting capacity problems are often teaching hospitals, located near previously closed facilities or in population growth areas. These findings suggest therefore that approaches to dealing with capacity problems might best focus on better matching individual hospitals' supply and demand adjustments.

A growing hole in the safety net: physician charity care declines again.

Continuing a decade-long trend, the proportion of U.S. physicians providing charity care dropped to 68 percent in 2004-05 from 76 percent in 1996-97, according to a national study from the Center for Studying Health System Change (HSC). The ongoing decline in physician charity care is alarming given the increase in the number of uninsured people, particularly during the first half of the decade. Declines in charity care were observed across most major specialties, practice types, practice income levels and geographic regions. Increasing financial pressures and changes in practice arrangements may account in part for the continuing decrease in physician charity care.

Can money buy quality? Physician response to pay for performance.

While pay for performance (P4P) has created a nationwide buzz among health plans, physicians and hospitals, most P4P initiatives are still on the drawing board, according to findings from the Center for Studying Health System Change's (HSC) 2005 site visits to 12 nationally representative communities. HSC focused on performance-based payment for physicians, finding that only two HSC communities-Orange County, Calif., and Boston-have significant physician P4P programs. In the other 10 communities, where almost no physicians have received quality-related payments to date, physician attitudes about P4P ranged from skeptical to hostile. P4P, a concept best suited to larger physician groups, may be difficult to implement in markets dominated by small physician practices. In spite of substantial barriers to initiating performance-related payment for physicians, most large health plans and Medicare are planning P4P programs.

Most uninsured people unaware of health care safety net providers.

Less than half of uninsured Americans either typically use or are aware of a safety net provider in their community, according to a national study by the Center for Studying Health System Change (HSC). Among all uninsured people, those with lower-incomes, racial/ethnic minorities and people living closer to safety net providers are more likely to know of or use a safety net provider for medical care. Uninsured people identify physician offices and community health centers most frequently as sources of lower-cost medical care, while hospital-based facilities--outpatient and emergency departments--are less likely to be mentioned. Despite high levels of emergency department (ED) use by uninsured people, few identify EDs as places to get affordable medical care.

Tough trade-offs: medical bills, family finances and access to care.

About 20 million American families-representing 43 million people-reported problems paying medical bills in 2003, according to a new study by the Center for Studying Health System Change (HSC). While uninsured families are more likely to have medical bill problems, two-thirds of families with problems paying medical bills have health insurance coverage. Of all families with medical bill problems, almost two-thirds reported difficulty paying for other basic necessities-rent, mortgage payments, transportation or food-as a result of medical debt. People in families with medical bill problems also reported much greater trouble getting care because of cost concerns-one in three did not get a prescription drug, one in four delayed care and one in eight went without needed care.

Financial pressures spur physician entrepreneurialism.

Using data from Round Four of the Community Tracking Study (CTS) site visits, we describe how recent revenue and cost pressures have led physicians to aggressively increase prices and service volume and provide fewer traditional services that are less lucrative. As a result, physicians' business practices are contributing to rising service use and hindering cost containment, which could impair access to critical services for certain populations. In response, policymakers may need to revisit regulation of physicians' conflicts of interest and consider how their financial incentives could be realigned. But the diversity of physicians' behavior requires that policy responses take account of differences between specialists and primary care physicians.

Medical malpractice liability crisis meets markets: stress in unexpected places.

While the causes of rapidly rising medical malpractice insurance premiums remain contentious and unsettled, the consequences are rippling through communities, threatening to diminish patients' access to care and increase health care costs, with an uncertain impact on quality, according to findings from the Center for Studying Health System Change's (HSC) 2002-03 site visits to 12 nationally representative communities. The severity of malpractice insurance problems varied across communities, with some physicians changing how and where they care for patients. For example, rather than treat patients in their offices, more physicians are referring patients to emergency departments. And many physicians, especially those practicing in high-risk specialties, are unwilling to provide emergency department on-call coverage because of malpractice liability concerns.