Pushing for Compliance: Improving Hospital Price Transparency
In the quest for healthcare price transparency, recent regulations have aimed to empower consumers with information crucial for making informed decisions about their care. However, compliance with these regulations has been a challenge for many hospitals, raising concerns about the effectiveness of current policies.
The Hospital Price Transparency rule, implemented by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) since January 2021, mandated hospitals to disclose prices for a list of 200 shoppable services in a machine-readable format on their websites. Despite the potential benefits, compliance has been lacking, with studies revealing that only a fraction of hospitals are fully adhering to the regulations.
A recent study conducted by Mittler and colleagues sheds light on the reasons behind hospitals’ failure to comply. While some hospitals have embraced the regulations, others have deliberately skirted around them, opting for partial compliance or outright refusal. Reasons cited for non-compliance range from the need for additional time and high data generation costs to concerns about competitive disadvantage in rate negotiations with payers.
To address these compliance challenges, policy changes have been proposed. CMS has significantly increased monetary penalties for violations, with larger hospitals now facing penalties of up to $2,007,500 per year. This move aims to incentivize compliance by making the potential cost of non-compliance higher than the cost of adhering to the regulations.
Moreover, the Transparency in Coverage regulation, which extends beyond hospitals to include insurers and group health plans, requires the disclosure of negotiated rates and cost-sharing data for covered services. This broader scope of transparency initiatives aims to provide consumers with comprehensive pricing information across various healthcare settings.
Despite these efforts, further improvements are needed to enhance the usability and effectiveness of price transparency data. Standardizing data reporting across payers and providers, eliminating unused billing codes, and centralizing data collection are recommended strategies to streamline information access and reduce data redundancies.
Additionally, mandating the reporting of volume information alongside pricing data can offer consumers insights into the frequency of services provided by healthcare facilities, correlating higher volumes with better outcomes.
In conclusion, while hospital price transparency is a crucial step towards healthcare reform, ensuring compliance and enhancing data usability are ongoing challenges. With continued policy refinement and enforcement, coupled with efforts to raise public awareness about the benefits of price transparency, the healthcare system can move closer to achieving its goals of empowering consumers and driving competition in the marketplace.
Reference