IPAB Has to Go, Providers and Advocates Urge
Some 500 healthcare provider groups and companies, patient advocates and employers on Thursday signed a letter to Congress urging repeal of the Independent Payment Advisory Board in fear that not only will its cost-cutting powers hurt patients' access to care, but that it will also raise costs for employers, and actually raise costs in the long run.
"Beneficiaries should have access to high quality care that emphasizes wellness and prevention (and…) programs should be sustainable, so today's working households know it will be there for them in the future," said Mary Grealy, president of the non-partisan Healthcare Leadership Council, a Washington, D.C. group that organized the letter.
However, she said, "The IPAB concept does not bring us closer to these Medicare goals. In fact there is a strong body of evidence telling us that IPAB will actually undermine healthcare quality and accessibility."
The council represents about 50 diverse health companies, from drug and device manufacturers to health insurers, hospitals, and employers such as Abbott and Aetna, the Mayo Clinic, and Walgreens.
Grealy made the remarks at a news conference to support the Protecting Seniors' Access to Medicare Act of 2013. That bill would repeal IPAB, a panel of 15 political appointees who would—in the event healthcare costs per Medicare beneficiary reach a certain level—have broad powers to apply targeted or across-the-board cuts to the healthcare sector to level federal expenditures.
- As Medicare Advantage Cuts Loom, Disagreement Over Program's Stability
- Medicare Advantage Carriers See 'No Choice' But to Accept Cuts
- 3 Management Lessons from a Supermarket Debacle
- Physicians to Appeal 'Docs v. Glocks' Ruling in FL
- Centralizing the Revenue Cycle Protects the Bottom Line
- CA Fines 8 Hospitals for Medical Errors
- Revenue Cycles Get a Boost from Simple JPEG Files
- IOM Identifies GME Problems, Calls for Finance Changes
- Employers Weigh Risks, Benefits of Private Exchanges
- Doctors Feel Pressure to Accept Risk-based Reimbursement