CA Sets 15% Target for Primary Care Spending Over Next Decade

KFF Health News, November 21, 2024

The funding boost aims to improve Californians' health and reduce the need for costlier care.

This article was published on Thursday, November 21, 2024 in KFF Health News.

By Vanessa G. Sánchez

A California agency charged with slowing health costs has set a lofty goal for insurers to direct 15% of their spending to primary care by 2034, part of the state's effort to expand the primary care workforce and give more people access to preventive care services.

The board of the state Office of Health Care Affordability in October set its benchmark well above the industry's current 7% primary care spending rate, in hopes of improving Californians' health and reducing the need for costlier care down the road.

"It's ambitious but achievable," said Elizabeth Landsberg, director of the state's Department of Health Care Access and Information, which oversees the affordability agency. "Plans and health systems need time to build the infrastructure to really change the way they're providing care."

But California's target comes just six months after the affordability board set an annual cap of 3.5% for overall growth in health care spending, potentially squeezing insurers from two sides.

"How these two policies will interact is unclear and we believe it is important to not lose sight of our overall goal of reducing the growth of health care costs," Mary Ellen Grant, a spokesperson for the California Association of Health Plans, said in a statement.

The affordability agency argues health plans are best positioned to promote more spending on preventive care services, since insurers are the ones that negotiate payment with providers. Landsberg said health plans could dangle incentives, such as offering higher reimbursement rates for primary care providers or paying for comprehensive care instead of for individual visits.

If successful, the agency says, the spending target could expand the primary care workforce through the hiring of staff and lead to better health management, disease prevention, and early diagnosis and treatment for more patients across the state.

California faces a shortage of primary care providers, which has limited people's access to preventive care. Approximately 6 million Californians live in parts of the state where there aren't enough doctors to meet people's needs, according to a data analysis by KFF, a health information nonprofit that includes KFF Health News.

A 2021 report by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine found that while more than 35% of health care visits in the U.S. are to primary care physicians, only about 5% of health spending is on primary care. That's compared with about 13% for some other developed nations.

"People have high regard for primary care, understand how important it is," said Kevin Grumbach, a professor of family and community medicine at the University of California-San Francisco who helped develop the state's primary care target. "They way overestimate how much of their tax dollars are actually going to support primary care."

Beginning next year, the affordability agency will start collecting data on how much health plans spend annually on primary care, particularly in settings such as community-based clinics, schools, and homeless shelters. Doctors, nurses, and pharmacists are among the providers whose services can be counted toward the goal. But the agency is excluding obstetricians, who sometimes serve as primary care providers for pregnant women, to focus on those offering "coordinated, comprehensive care" for patients.

Health plans will be expected to increase primary care spending from 0.5% to 1% of their total medical expenses each year until 15% is reached in 2034.

At least six states — Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Oregon, Rhode Island, and Washington — have already implemented primary care targets with some success. Rhode Island, which set a 10.7% goal, more than doubled its primary care spending from 2008 to 2018, while also reducing overall health spending.

The Biden administration has launched initiatives to improve primary care, but it has not set a primary care target for Medicare.

In California, the affordability agency collects health care spending data that captures nearly 33 million of the state's 39 million residents. The agency said it will begin to collect primary care spending data in fall 2025, but that information may not be released for two more years.

The state agency lacks enforcement authority in primary care spending, so to get health plans to hit the target, the agency is dangling financial incentives. At a primary care summit at the University of California-Davis in October, Landsberg said the agency could allow insurers to exceed the 3.5% overall growth cap if they show their spending went to boost primary care.

Efrain Talamantes, chief operating officer for AltaMed Health Services, one of the state's largest federally qualified community health centers, said these payments could help the health center expand services by training and hiring staff.

If health plans comply, the policy should lead to more primary care providers, timelier appointments, and better health outcomes, especially for disadvantaged communities that historically haven't had good access to care, Talamantes said.

"We should see an improvement where people are able to access their primary care the same day," he said.

As discussions continue, the state is working on targets to increase spending on behavioral health, another underinvested service. A vote on that measure could come next summer.

This article was produced by KFF Health News, which publishes California Healthline, an editorially independent service of the California Health Care Foundation. 

Vanessa G. Sánchez: vsanchez@kff.org, @vanesanchez_g

 

FTC, Indiana Residents Pressure State to Block Hospital Merger

KFF Health News, November 20, 2024

Research shows hospital consolidation fuels price hikes and healthcare spending, driving up costs for families, employers, Medicare and Medicaid.

This article was published on Wednesday, November 20, 2024 in KFF Health News.

By Samantha Liss

Indiana residents and federal officials are urging state health regulators to stop two rival hospitals in Terre Haute from merging. The deal, if approved, would leave residents with a hospital monopoly.

Union Health, a nonprofit whose main hospital is licensed as a 341-bed facility, would buy the county's only other acute care hospital, the 278-bed Terre Haute Regional Hospital, owned by for-profit chain HCA Healthcare and located 5 miles south across the city's downtown area. Union says the merger to create one larger nonprofit health system would improve the area's poor public health rankings.

The Indiana Department of Health received hundreds of comments on the proposed merger, according to documents KFF Health News obtained through a state public records request. Most people expressed opposition to the deal, citing concerns about longer travel times to get emergency care, higher prices, and fewer choices for Terre Haute's 58,000 residents and those in Vigo County's nearby rural communities.

"Monopoly should be just a board game. Not a healthcare system," a commenter listed as H. Osborne wrote to the state health agency.

Doctors, health economists, and the Federal Trade Commission called on the Indiana Department of Health to deny Union Hospital's merger application. Such mergers became possible after Indiana enacted a Certificate of Public Advantage law, or COPA, in 2021, shielding the deals from federal anti-monopoly laws.

Two dozen states have had COPA laws on their books at some point, despite FTC warnings that such mergers can become difficult to control and may decrease the overall quality of care. The trend has come amid a broader wave of hospital consolidation, which research shows fuels price hikes and healthcare spending, driving up costs for families, employers, and taxpayers who foot the bill for Medicare and Medicaid.

Union Health said its proposed deal would improve care and increase access to services while "maintaining cost efficiency" for patients.

"This is not merely a business transaction; it is a strategic effort to improve healthcare delivery in our community," Union said in a statement.

John Collett, an executive with Garmong Construction who also serves on the board of the Terre Haute Chamber of Commerce, wrote that the deal would help the region achieve its goal of boosting population and income levels. (Garmong Construction served as construction manager for Union on multiple projects, including one worth hundreds of millions of dollars, according to an online brochure of its past projects.)

"I firmly believe this to be a step in the right direction," Collett wrote.

But the FTC — using italics for emphasis — said the deal is "unlikely to result in improved quality and access" and "would not lead to a healthier workforce or a stronger local economy," according to comments the agency submitted to Indiana regulators.

Zack Cooper, a health economist and associate professor at Yale University, said the merger would probably damage the local economy and squeeze residents' wallets. Cooper's analysis estimates the price of care would rise by at least 10% for area residents and lead to 500 lost jobs, while nurses' pay would drop by at least 7%. His research predicts the deal also would lead to unnecessary deaths from suicide or overdose, stemming from those job losses.

"I firmly believe this merger would harm members of the public in Terre Haute and Vigo County," Cooper wrote.

As a condition of these types of mergers, state agencies typically agree to monitor hospital quality and prices to make up for the loss of competition. Union said monitoring would hold it accountable, according to its response to the FTC's public comments opposing the deal.

The FTC pushed back, saying the oversight mechanism "would be insufficient to contain costs" and is a "poor substitute" for competition. Even though Union would face limits on raising prices in Vigo County, the FTC said, the system might be able to hike them elsewhere, including at its hospital in neighboring Vermillion County to the north.

Indiana has some of the highest hospital prices in the nation, according to studies by Rand Corp., a research organization.

In Terre Haute, some doctors worry the deal would exacerbate existing problems. Kathleen Stienstra, a physician in private practice, voiced her concerns about Union's management style, saying it has led to an exodus of doctors.

"A monopoly will lead to further deterioration in services," she wrote.

Separately, the FTC referenced KFF Health News' reporting on Tennessee's Ballad Health, a 20-hospital monopoly in Appalachia, as a cautionary tale against such mergers.

Ballad Health was granted the nation's largest state-sanctioned hospital monopoly in 2018. Since then, its emergency rooms have become more than three times as slow.

COPAs, such as the one that Ballad operates under, "have proven unwieldy," are "difficult to manage," and "have failed to protect local communities from the harmful effects of anticompetitive hospital mergers," the FTC said in its comments on the Union-Regional merger.

Since Ballad launched in 2018 and became the nation's largest state-approved hospital monopoly, it has not lived up to some of its promises, KFF Health News reported. It has fallen short on meeting quality and charity care goals, according to annual reports from Ballad and the Tennessee Department of Health. After years of problems and complaints from patients, the state is now trying to hold Ballad more accountable for its quality of care.

Ballad declined to respond to KFF Health News inquiries regarding the FTC's comments.

Now the Indiana Department of Health must consider the comments and decide by early December whether the proposed merger would improve health outcomes, access to services, and quality of care. Under the department's standards, those benefits must "outweigh any potential disadvantages."

KFF Health News correspondent Brett Kelman contributed to this report.

Samantha Liss: sliss@kff.org, @samanthann

Nationwide IV Fluid Shortage Could Change How Hospitals Manage Patient Hydration

KFF Health News, November 19, 2024

Hospitals are facing seasonal strains on their already limited IV fluid resources.

This article was published on Tuesday, November 19, 2024 in KFF Health News.

By Jackie Fortiér

Hospitals around the country are conserving critical intravenous fluid supplies to cope with a shortage that may last months. Some hospital administrators say they are changing how they think about IV fluid hydration altogether.

Hurricane Helene, which hit North Carolina in September, wrecked a Baxter International facility that produces 60% of the IV fluids used in the U.S., according to the American Hospital Association.

The company was forced to stop production and is rationing its products. In an update posted Nov. 7, Baxter said its North Cove facility had resumed producing some IV fluids. In an email to KFF Health News, the company wrote that customers will be able to order normal quantities of "certain IV solutions products" by the end of the year, but there is no timeline for when the North Cove facility will be back to prehurricane production levels.

Meanwhile, hospitals are facing seasonal strains on their already limited IV fluid resources, said Sam Elgawly, chief of resource stewardship at Inova, a health system in the Washington, D.C., area.

"We've been very aggressive in our conservation measures," Elgawly said, stressing that he does not believe patient care has been compromised. He told KFF Health News that across the system IV fluid usage has dropped 55% since early October.

Elgawly called the shortage a crisis that he expects to have to continue managing for some time. "We are going to operate under the assumption that this is going to be the way it is through the end of 2024 and have adopted our demand/conservation measures accordingly," he said.

At the end of the calendar year, many patients with insurance hurry to schedule surgical procedures before their deductibles reset in January. Elgawly is eyeing that typical surgical rush and the impending peak of respiratory virus season as he tries to stockpile IV fluid bags. Hospitals such as Inova's are using different ways to conserve, such as giving some medications intravenously, but without a dedicated IV fluid bag, known as a push medication.

"You don't even need a bag at all. You just give the medication without the bag," he said. "There has been increasing literature over the last 10 to 20 years that indicates maybe you don't need to use as much. And this accelerated our sort of innovation and testing of that idea."

Monica Coleman is a nurse at a Department of Veterans Affairs hospital in North Chicago. She said using push medications takes more time out of a nurse's already hectic schedule because then they need to monitor the patient.

"This could increase adverse effects within the patient, because we're giving the medication at a faster rate," she said.

Elgawly is also interested in retooling electronic health records to question doctor orders for more IV hydration.

"Does the patient actually need that second bag? How did they do today with eating or drinking water or juice? They did well? They don't need the bag. So it's little conservation mechanisms like that that, when you add them across, you know, the 2,000-patient system that Inova is, make a significant dent," he said.

Simpler conservation measures could become common after the shortage abates, said Vince Green, chief medical officer for Pipeline Health, a small hospital system in the Los Angeles area that serves mainly people on Medicare and Medicaid.

First, Green would like to see data showing that patient outcomes aren't affected. But for now, some of the new strategies just make sense to him. He has directed hospital staff to use up the entire IV bag before starting another.

"If they come in with IV fluids that the paramedics have started, let's continue it. If it saves half a bag of fluids, so be it, but it adds up over time," he said.

Patients may be asked to take more accountability for their hydration, by drinking Gatorade or water rather than the default of hydrating through an IV, he said.

"From an environmental aspect, we don't need to have this much waste and fill up our landfills. If we could reduce stuff, I think it'd be wise," he said.

But he'll feel better when his hospitals receive a full order, which could be weeks away. Green said they are down to a two-week supply, with an expected increase in hospitalizations due to respiratory virus season.

"We're purchasing every IV fluid bag that we can get," he said.

Jackie Fortiér: @JackieFortier

Scientists Fear What's Next for Public Health if RFK Jr. Is Allowed to 'Go Wild'

KFF Health News, November 15, 2024

Should Kennedy win Senate confirmation, critics say a radical antiestablishment medical movement would take power.

This article was published on Friday, November 15, 2024 in KFF Health News.

By Arthur Allen

Many scientists at the federal health agencies await the second Donald Trump administration with dread as well as uncertainty over how the president-elect will reconcile starkly different philosophies among the leaders of his team.

Trump announced Thursday he'll nominate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to be secretary of the Health and Human Services Department, after saying during his campaign he'd let the anti-vaccine activist "go wild" on medicines, food, and health.

Should Kennedy win Senate confirmation, his critics say a radical antiestablishment medical movement with roots in past centuries would take power, threatening the achievements of a science-based public health order painstakingly built since World War II.

Trump said in a post on the social platform X that "Americans have been crushed by the industrial food complex and drug companies who have engaged in deception, misinformation, and disinformation when it comes to Public Health," echoing Kennedy's complaints about the medical establishment. The former Democratic presidential candidate will "end the Chronic Disease epidemic" and "Make American Great and Healthy Again!" Trump wrote.

Vaccine makers' stocks dipped Thursday afternoon amid news reports ahead of Trump's RFK announcement.

If Kennedy makes good on his vision for transforming public health, childhood vaccine mandates could wither. New vaccines might never win approval, even as the FDA allows dangerous or inefficient therapies onto the market. Agency websites could trumpet unproven or debunked health ideas. And if Trump's plan to weaken civil service rights goes through, anyone who questions these decisions could be summarily fired.

"Never has anybody like RFK Jr. gotten anywhere close to the position he may be in to actually shape policy," said Lewis Grossman, a law professor at American University and the author of "Choose Your Medicine," a history of U.S. public health.

Kennedy and an adviser Calley Means, a health care entrepreneur, say dramatic changes are needed because of the high levels of chronic disease in the United States. Government agencies have corruptly tolerated or promoted unhealthy diets and dangerous drugs and vaccines, they say.

Means and Kennedy did not respond to requests for comment. Four conservative members of the first Trump health bureaucracy spoke on condition of anonymity. They eagerly welcomed the former president's return but voiced few opinions about specific policies. Days after last week's election, RFK Jr. announced that the Trump administration would immediately fire and replace 600 National Institutes of Health officials. He set up a website seeking crowdsourced nominees for federal appointments, with a host of vaccination foes and chiropractors among the early favorites.

At meetings last week at Mar-a-Lago involving Elon Musk, Tucker Carlson, Donald Trump Jr., Kennedy, and Means, according to Politico, some candidates for leading health posts included Jay Bhattacharya, a Stanford University scientist who opposed covid lockdowns; Florida Surgeon General Joseph Ladapo, who opposes mRNA covid vaccines and rejected well-established disease control practices during a measles outbreak; Johns Hopkins University surgeon Marty Makary; and Means' sister, Stanford-trained surgeon and health guru Casey Means.

All are mavericks of a sort, though their ideas are not uniform. Yet the notion that they could elbow aside a century of science-based health policy is profoundly troubling to many health professionals. They see Kennedy's presence at the heart of the Trump transition as a triumph of the "medical freedom" movement, which arose in opposition to the Progressive Era idea that experts should guide health care policy and practices.

It could represent a turning away from the expectation that mainstream doctors be respected for their specialized knowledge, said Howard Markel, an emeritus professor of pediatrics and history at the University of Michigan, who began his clinical career treating AIDS patients and ended it after suffering a yearlong bout of long covid.

"We've gone back to the idea of 'every man his own doctor,'" he said, referring to a phrase that gained currency in the 19th century. It was a bad idea then and it's even worse now, he said.

"What does that do to the morale of scientists?" Markel asked. The public health agencies, largely a post-WWII legacy, are "remarkable institutions, but you can screw up these systems, not just by defunding them but by deflating the true patriots who work in them."

FDA Commissioner Robert Califf told a conference on Nov. 12 that he worried about mass firings at the FDA. "I'm biased, but I feel like the FDA is sort of at peak performance right now," he said. At a conference the next day, CDC Director Mandy Cohen reminded listeners of the horrors of vaccine-preventable diseases like measles and polio. "I don't want to have to see us go backward in order to remind ourselves that vaccines work," she said.

Stocks of some the biggest vaccine developers fell after news outlets led by Politico reported that the RFK pick was expected. Moderna, the developer of one of the most popular covid-19 vaccines, closed down 5.6%. Pfizer, another covid vaccine manufacturer, fell 2.6%. GSK, the producer of vaccines protecting against respiratory syncytial virus, hepatitis A and B, rotavirus, and influenza, fell just over 2%. French drug company Sanofi, whose website boasts its products vaccinate over 500 million annually, tumbled nearly 3.5%.

Exodus From the Agencies?

With uncertainty over the direction of their agencies, many older scientists at the NIH, FDA, and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention are considering retirement, said a senior NIH scientist who spoke on the condition of anonymity for fear of losing his job.

"Everybody I talk to sort of takes a deep breath and says, 'It doesn't look good,'" the official said.

"I hear of many people getting CVs ready," said Arthur Caplan, a professor of bioethics at New York University. They include two of his former students who now work at the FDA, Caplan said.

Others, such as Georges Benjamin, executive director of the American Public Health Association, have voiced wait-and-see attitudes. "We worked with the Trump administration last time. There were times things worked reasonably well," he said, "and times when things were chaotic, particularly during covid." Any wholesale deregulation efforts in public health would be politically risky for Trump, he said, because when administrations "screw things up, people get sick and die."

At the FDA, at least, "it's very hard to make seismic changes," former FDA chief counsel Dan Troy said.

But the administration could score easy libertarian-tinged wins by, for example, telling its new FDA chief to reverse the agency's refusal to approve the psychedelic drug MDMA from the company Lykos. Access to psychedelics to treat post-traumatic stress disorder has grabbed the interest of many veterans. Vitamins and supplements, already only lightly regulated, will probably get even more of a free pass from the next Trump FDA.

'Medical Freedom' or 'Nanny State'

Trump's health influencers are not monolithic. Analysts see potential clashes among Kennedy, Musk, and more traditional GOP voices. Casey Means, a "holistic" MD at the center of Kennedy's "Make America Healthy Again" team, calls for the government to cut ties with industry and remove sugar, processed food, and toxic substances from American diets. Republicans lampooned such policies as exemplifying a "nanny state" when Mike Bloomberg promoted them as mayor of New York City.

Both the libertarian and "medical freedom" wings oppose aspects of regulation, but Silicon Valley biotech supporters of Trump, like Samuel Hammond of the Foundation for American Innovation, have pressed the agency to speed drug and device approvals, while Kennedy's team says the FDA and other agencies have been "captured" by industry, resulting in dangerous and unnecessary drugs, vaccines, and devices on the market.

Kennedy and Casey Means want to end industry user fees that pay for drug and device rules and support nearly half the FDA's $7.2 billion budget. It's unclear whether Congress would make up the shortfall at a time when Trump and Musk have vowed to slash government programs. User fees are set by laws Congress passes every five years, most recently in 2022.

The industry supports the user-fee system, which bolsters FDA staffing and speeds product approvals. Writing new rules "requires an enormous amount of time, effort, energy, and collaboration" by FDA staff, Troy said. Policy changes made through informal "guidance" alone are not binding, he added.

Kennedy and the Means siblings have suggested overhauling agricultural policies so that they incentivize the cultivation of organic vegetables instead of industrial corn and soy, but "I don't think they'll be very influential in that area," Caplan said. "Big Ag is a powerful entrenched industry, and they aren't interested in changing."

"There's a fine line between the libertarian impulse of the 'medical freedom' types and advocating a reformation of American bodies, which is definitely 'nanny state' territory," said historian Robert Johnston of the University of Illinois-Chicago.

Specific federal agencies are likely to face major changes. Republicans want to trim the NIH's 27 research institutes and centers to 15, slashing Anthony Fauci's legacy by splitting the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, which he led for 38 years, into two or three pieces.

Numerous past attempts to slim down the NIH have failed in the face of campaigns by patients, researchers, and doctors. GOP lawmakers have advocated substantial cuts to the CDC budget in recent years, including an end to funding gun violence, climate change, and health equity research. If carried out, Project 2025, a policy blueprint from the conservative Heritage Foundation, would divide the agency into data-collecting and health-promoting arms. The CDC has limited clout in Washington, although former CDC directors and public health officials are defending its value.

"It would be surprising if CDC wasn't on the radar" for potential change, said Anne Schuchat, a former principal deputy director of the agency, who retired in 2021.

The CDC's workforce is "very employable" and might start to look for other work if "their area of focus is going to be either cut or changed," she said.

Kennedy's attacks on HHS and its agencies as corrupted tools of the drug industry, and his demands that the FDA allow access to scientifically controversial drugs, are closely reminiscent of the 1970s campaign by conservative champions of Laetrile, a dangerous and ineffective apricot-pit derivative touted as a cancer treatment. Just as Kennedy championed off-patent drugs like ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine to treat covid, Laetrile's defenders claimed that the FDA and a profit-seeking industry were conspiring to suppress a cheaper alternative.

The public and industry have often been skeptical of health regulatory agencies over the decades, Grossman said. The agencies succeed best when they are called in to fix things — particularly after bad medicine kills or damages children, he said.

The 1902 Biologics Control Act, which created the NIH's forerunner, was enacted in response to smallpox vaccine contamination that killed at least nine children in Camden, New Jersey. Child poisonings linked to the antifreeze solvent for a sulfa drug prompted the modern FDA's creation in 1938. The agency, in 1962, acquired the power to demand evidence of safety and efficacy before the marketing of drugs after the thalidomide disaster, in which children of pregnant women taking the anti-nausea drug were born with terribly malformed limbs.

If vaccination rates plummet and measles and whooping cough outbreaks proliferate, babies could die or suffer brain damage. "It won't be harmless for the administration to broadly attack public health," said Alfredo Morabia, a professor of epidemiology at Columbia University and the editor-in-chief of the American Journal of Public Health. "It would be like taking away your house insurance."

Sam Whitehead, Stephanie Armour, David Hilzenrath, and Darius Tahir contributed to this report.

Healthbeat is a nonprofit newsroom covering public health published by Civic News Company and KFF Health News. Sign up for its newsletters here.

[Update: This article was updated on the evening of Nov. 14 to reflect Trump's nomination of Kennedy as secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services and movement in some pharmaceutical companies' stock prices.]

Arthur Allen: aallen@kff.org, @ArthurAllen202

Pay First, Deliver Later: Some Women Are Being Asked to Prepay for Their Baby

KFF Health News, November 15, 2024

The practice is legal, but patient advocacy groups call it unethical.

This article was published on Friday, November 15, 2024 in KFF Health News.

By Renuka Rayasam

In April, just 12 weeks into her pregnancy, Kathleen Clark was standing at the receptionist window of her OB-GYN's office when she was asked to pay $960, the total the office estimated she would owe after she delivered.

Clark, 39, was shocked that she was asked to pay that amount during this second prenatal visit. Normally, patients receive the bill after insurance has paid its part, and for pregnant women that's usually only when the pregnancy ends. It would be months before the office filed the claim with her health insurer.

Clark said she felt stuck. The Cleveland, Tennessee, obstetrics practice was affiliated with a birthing center where she wanted to deliver. Plus, she and her husband had been wanting to have a baby for a long time. And Clark was emotional, because just weeks earlier her mother had died.

"You're standing there at the window, and there's people all around, and you're trying to be really nice," recalled Clark, through tears. "So, I paid it."

On online baby message boards and other social media forums, pregnant women say they are being asked by their providers to pay out-of-pocket fees earlier than expected. The practice is legal, but patient advocacy groups call it unethical. Medical providers argue that asking for payment up front ensures they get compensated for their services.

How frequently this happens is hard to track because it is considered a private transaction between the provider and the patient. Therefore, the payments are not recorded in insurance claims data and are not studied by researchers.

Patients, medical billing experts, and patient advocates say the billing practice causes unexpected anxiety at a time of already heightened stress and financial pressure. Estimates can sometimes be higher than what a patient might ultimately owe and force people to fight for refunds if they miscarry or the amount paid was higher than the final bill.

Up-front payments also create hurdles for women who may want to switch providers if they are unhappy with their care. In some cases, they may cause women to forgo prenatal care altogether, especially in places where few other maternity care options exist.

It's "holding their treatment hostage," said Caitlin Donovan, a senior director at the Patient Advocate Foundation.

Medical billing and women's health experts believe OB-GYN offices adopted the practice to manage the high cost of maternity care and the way it is billed for in the U.S.

When a pregnancy ends, OB-GYNs typically file a single insurance claim for routine prenatal care, labor, delivery, and, often, postpartum care. That practice of bundling all maternity care into one billing code began three decades ago, said Lisa Satterfield, senior director of health and payment policy at the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. But such bundled billing has become outdated, she said.

Previously, pregnant patients had been subject to copayments for each prenatal visit, which might lead them to skip crucial appointments to save money. But the Affordable Care Act now requires all commercial insurers to fully cover certain prenatal services. Plus, it's become more common for pregnant women to switch providers, or have different providers handle prenatal care, labor, and delivery — especially in rural areas where patient transfers are common.

Some providers say prepayments allow them to spread out one-time payments over the course of the pregnancy to ensure that they are compensated for the care they do provide, even if they don't ultimately deliver the baby.

"You have people who, unfortunately, are not getting paid for the work that they do," said Pamela Boatner, who works as a midwife in a Georgia hospital.

While she believes women should receive pregnancy care regardless of their ability to pay, she also understands that some providers want to make sure their bill isn't ignored after the baby is delivered. New parents might be overloaded with hospital bills and the costs of caring for a new child, and they may lack income if a parent isn't working, Boatner said.

In the U.S., having a baby can be expensive. People who obtain health insurance through large employers pay an average of nearly $3,000 out-of-pocket for pregnancy, childbirth, and postpartum care, according to the Peterson-KFF Health System Tracker. In addition, many people are opting for high-deductible health insurance plans, leaving them to shoulder a larger share of the costs. Of the 100 million U.S. people with health care debt, 12% attribute at least some of it to maternity care, according to a 2022 KFF poll.

Families need time to save money for the high costs of pregnancy, childbirth, and child care, especially if they lack paid maternity leave, said Joy Burkhard, CEO of the Policy Center for Maternal Mental Health, a Los Angeles-based policy think tank. Asking them to prepay "is another gut punch," she said. "What if you don't have the money? Do you put it on credit cards and hope your credit card goes through?"

Calculating the final costs of childbirth depends on multiple factors, such as the timing of the pregnancy, plan benefits, and health complications, said Erin Duffy, a health policy researcher at the University of Southern California's Schaeffer Center for Health Policy and Economics. The final bill for the patient is unclear until a health plan decides how much of the claim it will cover, she said.

But sometimes the option to wait for the insurer is taken away.

During Jamie Daw's first pregnancy in 2020, her OB-GYN accepted her refusal to pay in advance because Daw wanted to see the final bill. But in 2023, during her second pregnancy, a private midwifery practice in New York told her that since she had a high-deductible plan, it was mandatory to pay $2,000 spread out with monthly payments.

Daw, a health policy researcher at Columbia University, delivered in September 2023 and got a refund check that November for $640 to cover the difference between the estimate and the final bill.

"I study health insurance," she said. "But, as most of us know, it's so complicated when you're really living it."

While the Affordable Care Act requires insurers to cover some prenatal services, it doesn't prohibit providers from sending their final bill to patients early. It would be a challenge politically and practically for state and federal governments to attempt to regulate the timing of the payment request, said Sabrina Corlette, a co-director of the Center on Health Insurance Reforms at Georgetown University. Medical lobbying groups are powerful and contracts between insurers and medical providers are proprietary.

Because of the legal gray area, Lacy Marshall, an insurance broker at Rapha Health and Life in Texas, advises clients to ask their insurer if they can refuse to prepay their deductible. Some insurance plans prohibit providers in their network from requiring payment up front.

If the insurer says they can refuse to pay up front, Marshall said, she tells clients to get established with a practice before declining to pay, so that the provider can't refuse treatment.

Clark said she met her insurance deductible after paying for genetic testing, extra ultrasounds, and other services out of her health care flexible spending account. Then she called her OB-GYN's office and asked for a refund.

"I got my spine back," said Clark, who had previously worked at a health insurer and a medical office. She got an initial check for about half the $960 she originally paid.

In August, Clark was sent to the hospital after her blood pressure spiked. A high-risk pregnancy specialist — not her original OB-GYN practice — delivered her son, Peter, prematurely via emergency cesarean section at 30 weeks.

It was only after she resolved most of the bills from the delivery that she received the rest of her refund from the other OB-GYN practice.

This final check came in October, just days after Clark brought Peter home from the hospital, and after multiple calls to the office. She said it all added stress to an already stressful period.

"Why am I having to pay the price as a patient?" she said. "I'm just trying to have a baby."

Renuka Rayasam: rrayasam@kff.org, @renurayasam

KFF Health News Sues to Force Disclosure of Medicare Advantage Audit Records

KFF Health News, November 14, 2024

Lawyers for KFF say the information is 'critically important to public oversight of government misspending.'

This article was published on Nov. 12, 2024 in KFF Health News.

By Fred Schulte

KFF Health News has sued HHS' Office of Inspector General to compel it to release a range of Medicare Advantage health plan audits and other financial records.

The suit, filed Nov. 12 in U.S. District Court in San Francisco under the Freedom of Information Act, or FOIA, seeks documents from the HHS inspector general's office, which acts as a watchdog over federal health insurance programs run by CMS.

The suit asks for correspondence and other records of contact between HHS officials or their representatives and Medicare Advantage organizations concerning overpayment audit findings and potential financial penalties.

It also seeks records reflecting communication between HHS and CMS officials regarding the government's policies for recovering overpayments discovered during Medicare Advantage audits, including a controversial decision in January 2023 to limit dollar recoveries for audits dating back a decade or more.

Additionally, the suit seeks copies of government contracts awarded to outside firms that have conducted Medicare Advantage audits, including budgets and performance evaluations, dating to 2020. In these audits, reviewers take a sample of 200 patients from a health plan and determine whether medical records support the diagnoses the government paid health plans to treat.

KFF Health News requested the records in August, but, more than two months later, "no documents, responsive or otherwise, have been produced," the suit says.

Sam Cate-Gumpert, an attorney with Davis Wright Tremaine, which is representing KFF Health News pro bono in the case, said the information is "critically important to public oversight of government misspending."

According to the suit, the inspector general's office has audited the Medicare Advantage program more than three dozen times since 2019, revealing billions of dollars in overpayments.

But government officials have not recouped the overcharges, according to the suit.

The HHS Office of Inspector General "has left taxpayers footing the bill for billions of dollars in overpayments — even though HHS OIG's primary purpose is to combat fraud and waste in Medicare and other federally funded health programs," the suit alleges.

"In fact, taxpayers have been forced to pay for the Medicare Advantage program's wasteful spending twice — first, because of the program itself, and second, because of the costs of the audits, which the government spends millions of dollars to conduct," according to the suit.

Medicare Advantage, mostly run by private insurance companies, has enrolled more than 33 million seniors and people with disabilities, more than half of people on Medicare.

But the program has faced criticism that it costs billions of dollars more than it should with research showing that many health plans exaggerate how sick patients are to boost payments.

A FOIA lawsuit filed by KFF Health News in September 2019 prompted CMS to release summaries of 90 Medicare Advantage audits revealing millions of dollars in overpayments. As part of a settlement, CMS paid $63,000 in KFF Health News' legal fees, though it did not admit to wrongfully withholding the records.

The HHS Office of Inspector General had no immediate comment on the suit.

Fred Schulte: fschulte@kff.org, @FredSchulte

Watchdog Calls for Tighter Scrutiny of Medicare Advantage Home Visits

KFF Health News, November 8, 2024

So far CMS has rejected OIG's push to limit payments for house visits with no medical treatment — a potential red flag that may signal overcharges.

This article was published on Friday, November 8, 2024, in KFF Health News.

A new federal watchdog audit is ratcheting up pressure on government officials to crack down on billions of dollars in overcharges linked to Medicare Advantage home visits.

But so far, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services has rejected a recommendation from the Health and Human Services Inspector General to limit payments stemming from house visits that don't result in any medical treatment — a potential red flag that may signal overcharges.

In late October, the HHS watchdog found that the health plans pocketed $7.5 billion in 2023 from diagnosing health conditions that prompted no medical services — about $4.2 billion of it through health assessments done in patients' homes. And court records show that for a decade or more, CMS officials have failed to act on their concerns that the home visits waste tax dollars and should be limited.

UnitedHealthcare, the largest Medicare Advantage contractor, accounted for about two-thirds of the payments tied to home visits and chart reviews, in which health plans mine patient medical files to add new diagnoses that can bring in additional revenue, according to the audit.

Assistant Inspector General Erin Bliss said the health plans are making billions without offering any treatment for medical conditions they flag during the visits, such as diabetes and major depression.

"Frankly, it needs to stop," Bliss said.

CMS, which runs the Medicare program, disagrees.

In a statement to KFF Health News by spokesperson Alexx Pons, the agency said it "appreciates the OIG's review in this area" and will continue to study the issue.

However, CMS disagreed with the OIG's call to restrict use of home health assessments in computing how much to pay health plans. People on Medicare "should have access to care that is appropriately provided in the home setting," CMS wrote in a written response included in the audit report.

"One would think that CMS would kick its regulatory oversight up a notch or two," said Richard Lieberman, a Colorado health data analytics expert.

"In contrast, CMS appears to be unconcerned and is telling OIG to stay out of their lane," he said.

UnitedHealthcare spokesperson Heather Soule said in a statement that the OIG had drawn "inaccurate conclusions" in the audit.

The home visits are "among the most comprehensive and thorough assessments of a patient's health and physical environment available in the healthcare system, helping to identify and drive needed follow-on care for the vast majority of the patients with whom we engage," according to the company.

No Care Provided

Government spending on Medicare Advantage, which is dominated by UnitedHealthcare and a handful of other health insurance companies, is expected to hit $462 billion this year.

The industry, whose more than 33 million members make up over half of people eligible for Medicare, argues that most enrollees are satisfied with the care they receive and typically pay less out-of-pocket than those on original Medicare.

Whether Medicare Advantage is a good deal for taxpayers is another matter, largely because many health plans exaggerate how sick patients are to boost their payments, multiple federal audits and other investigations have shown. Medicare pays the health plans higher rates for sicker patients.

For fiscal year 2023, CMS identified $12.7 billion in overpayments linked to diagnoses not supported by patients' medical records.

The OIG audit tied $7.5 billion in payments to health conditions that prompted no treatment, including serious diseases such as diabetes, congestive heart failure, and major depression. That suggests that the medical condition either didn't exist or that the health plan failed to treat it adequately, auditors said.

"These are serious conditions. You would think you would see additional care during that year," said Jacqualine Reid, who led the OIG audit team. "We are asking CMS to step up its oversight."

Homegrown

The in-home visits have sparked controversy for more than a decade. A June 2014 media investigation found that a sharp rise in home visits had inflated Medicare's costs by billions of dollars. The visits, which typically last less than an hour, are often conducted by nurse practitioners, who do not treat the patient, but go over a checklist of possible health conditions.

Sabrina Skeldon, a Texas lawyer who advises physicians on billing issues, said problems arise when health plans fail to order necessary medical tests to confirm a diagnosis made during a home visit — and treat it.

Skeldon noted that The Cigna Group in 2023 paid $172 million to settle a whistleblower lawsuit that alleged its Medicare Advantage plan illegally collected payments for medical diagnoses that were based solely on in-home assessments.

The OIG audit comes as the Justice Department presses a civil fraud case that accuses UnitedHealth Group of cheating Medicare out of more than $2 billion by mining patient records to churn up diagnoses that boosted revenue, while ignoring evidence of overpayments. The company denies the allegations.

Court filings from the case show CMS officials were concerned years ago that home visits and chart reviews could needlessly drive up costs.

In April 2014, CMS backed off a proposal to restrict their use amid complaints from the industry that it would lose billions of dollars as a result. Similarly, CMS officials scrapped a proposal to tighten scrutiny on the chart reviews after what one official called an "uproar" from the industry.

CMS officials also had concerns that unchecked home visits might affect efforts to recover overpayments through billing reviews known as "RADV" audits.

Former CMS official Thomas Hutchinson, who ran the agency's Medicare Plan Payment Group from September 2006 through June 2010, testified in a deposition that officials had "heard about various folks that figured out how they could RADV-proof things by doing in-home visits."

In a confidential April 2015 slide presentation, CMS officials observed that health plans were "now conducting health risk assessments in beneficiaries' homes. One purpose of the assessments is to identify conditions and create medical records documentation that substantiates diagnoses."

And an October 2015 CMS memo circulated among senior agency staff cites "limitations around home visits" among the possible ways to "strengthen" the RADV audits.

In its statement to KFF Health News, CMS said it was "committed" to ensuring that diagnoses health plans submitted for payment were accurate. But the agency declined to answer written questions about the impact of home visits on its audit program, which has yet to complete reviews of payments dating back as far as 2011.

UnitedHealthcare had the lowest rates of unconfirmed diagnoses among five large Medicare Advantage organizations audited in 2011, according to court records.

Overall, the company ended up with underpayments of more than $261 million for 15 of its plans audited for 2011-2013, court records show. The audit findings for other Medicare Advantage firms are blacked out in court filings.

CMS audits payments to just 30 out of more than 700 contracts a year. That's not enough to protect tax dollars, said Matthew Fiedler, a health policy researcher at The Brookings Institution.

"They should be auditing 10 times as many contracts," he said. "Where we are now you are not likely to get caught."

Fred Schulte: fschulte@kff.org, @FredSchulte

Community Health Workers Spread Across the U.S., Even in Rural Areas

KFF Health News, November 6, 2024

The programs are often based at hospital systems or community health centers.

This article was published on Wednesday, November 6, 2024 in KFF Health News.

By Arielle Zionts

HURON, S.D. — Kelly Engebretson was excited to get fitted for a prosthetic after having part of his leg amputated. But he wasn't sure how he'd get to the appointment.

Nah Thu Thu Win's twin sons needed vaccinations before starting kindergarten. But she speaks little English, and the boys lacked health insurance.

William Arce and Wanda Serrano were recovering from recent surgeries. But the couple needed help sorting out their insurance and understanding their bills.

Engebretson, Win, Arce, and Serrano were fortunate to have someone to help.

They're all paired with community health workers in Huron, a city of 14,000 people known for being home to the state fair and what's billed as the world's largest pheasant sculpture.

Three workers, employed by the Huron Regional Medical Center, help patients navigate the health system and address barriers, like poverty or unstable housing, that could keep them from getting care. Community health workers can also provide basic education on managing chronic health problems, such as diabetes or high cholesterol.

Community health worker programs are spreading across the U.S., including in rural areas and small cities as health providers and state and federal governments increasingly invest in them. These initiatives gained attention during the coronavirus pandemic and have been found to improve people's health and access to preventive care while reducing expensive hospital visits.

Community health worker programs can address common barriers in rural areas, where people face higher rates of poverty and certain health problems, said Gabriela Boscán Fauquier, who oversees community health worker initiatives at the National Rural Health Association.

The workers are "an extension of the health care system" and serve as a link "between the formality of this health care system and the community," she said.

The programs are often based at hospital systems or community health centers. The workers have a median pay of $23 an hour, according to the federal Bureau of Labor Statistics. Patients are typically referred to programs by clinicians who notice personal struggles or frequent visits to hospital emergency departments.

South Dakota is among the states that have recently funded community health worker programs, developed training requirements for the workers, and approved Medicaid reimbursement for their services. The state's certification program requires 200 hours of coursework and 40 hours of job shadowing.

Huron Regional Medical Center launched its initiative in fall 2022, after receiving a $228,000 federal grant. The program is now funded by the nonprofit hospital and Medicaid reimbursements.

Huron, a small city surrounded by rural areas, is mostly populated by white people. But thousands of Karen people — an ethnic minority from the Southeast Asian country of Myanmar — began arriving in 2006. Many are refugees. The city also has a significant Hispanic population from the Caribbean, Mexico, and Central and South America.

Mickie Scheibe, one of Huron's community health workers, recently stopped by the house of client Kelly Engebretson. The 61-year-old hadn't been able to work since he had part of his leg amputated, due to diabetes complications.

Scheibe helps with "the hoops you've got to jump through," such as applying for Medicaid, Engebretson said.

He told Scheibe that he didn't know how he was going to get to his prosthetic fitting in Sioux Falls — a two-hour drive from home. Scheibe, 54, said she would help find him a safe ride.

She also invited Engebretson to a diabetes education program.

"Put me down as a definitely absolutely," he replied, adding that he'd invite his mother to tag along.

The same day, Scheibe's co-worker Sau-Mei Ramos visited the apartment where William Arce and Wanda Serrano live. Arce was recovering from heart surgery, while Serrano was healing from knee and shoulder operations.

The couple, both 61, moved three years ago from Puerto Rico to be near their children in Huron. Ramos, who's also from Puerto Rico, coordinated their appointments, answered their billing questions, and helped Arce find a walker and supplemental insurance.

Ramos, 29, handed Arce a pamphlet about heart health and asked him to read the section on angina, the pain that results when not enough blood flows to the heart.

"Qué entiende?" she said, asking Arce what he understood about his condition. Arce, speaking in Spanish, responded that he knew what angina was and what symptoms to watch for.

Later that day, Paw Wah Sa, the third community health worker in town, met with client Nah Thu Thu Win, who moved to Huron in February from Myanmar with her husband and twin 6-year-olds. The Win family, like Sa, are part of the local Karen community, whose people have been persecuted under the military rulers of Myanmar, the country formerly known as Burma.

Win, 29, had assumed the kids would qualify for Medicaid. But unlike most other states, South Dakota does not immediately offer coverage to children who legally immigrated into the U.S. The boys' father hopes to eventually add them to his work-sponsored insurance.

Sa didn't want the kids to have to wait for health care. The 24-year-old previously took the twins to a free mobile dental clinic in Huron. It turned out they needed more advanced dental work, which they could get free only in Sioux Falls. Sa helped make the arrangements.

Many Karen residents and people from rural parts of Latin America had little access to health care before moving to the U.S., Sa and Ramos said. They said a major part of their job is explaining what kind of care is available, and when it's important to seek help.

The three community health workers sometimes take clients grocery shopping, to teach them how to understand labels and identify healthful food.

Boscán Fauquier, with the National Rural Health Association, said that because community health workers are familiar with the cultures they serve, they can suggest affordable food that clients are familiar with.

Rural America's overall population is shrinking, but the 2020 census showed it has become more diverse as people representing ethnic minorities are drawn to jobs in industries such as farming, meatpacking, and mining. Others are attracted by rural areas' lower crime rates and cheaper housing.

Boscán Fauquier said many rural community health worker programs serve people from minority groups, who are more likely than white people to face barriers to health care.

She pointed to programs serving Native American reservations, the Black Belt region of the South, and Spanish-speaking communities, where the workers are called promotoras. But community health workers also serve rural white communities, such as those in Appalachia impacted by the opioid crisis.

Medicare, the federal health program for adults 65 or older, has been reimbursing community health worker services since January. Boscán Fauquier said advocates hope more state Medicaid programs and private insurers will allow reimbursement too.

Engebretson said he's happy to see community health workers across South Dakota, not just in big cities.

The more they "can branch out to the people, the better it would be," he said.

Arielle Zionts: azionts@kff.org, @Ajzionts

In Vermont, Where Almost Everyone Has Insurance, Many Can't Find or Afford Care

KFF Health News, November 6, 2024

Vermonters pay the highest prices nationwide for individual health coverage, and state reports show its providers and insurers are in financial trouble.

This article was published on Wednesday, November 6, 2024 in KFF Health News.

By Phil Galewitz

RICHMOND, Vt. — On a warm autumn morning, Roger Brown walked through a grove of towering trees whose sap fuels his maple syrup business. He was checking for damage after recent flooding. But these days, his workers' health worries him more than his trees'.

The cost of Slopeside Syrup's employee health insurance premiums spiked 24% this year. Next year it will rise 14%.

The jumps mean less money to pay workers, and expensive insurance coverage that doesn't ensure employees can get care, Brown said. "Vermont is seen as the most progressive state, so how is healthcare here so screwed up?"

Vermont consistently ranks among the healthiest states, and its unemployment and uninsured rates are among the lowest. Yet Vermonters pay the highest prices nationwide for individual health coverage, and state reports show its providers and insurers are in financial trouble. Nine of the state's 14 hospitals are losing money, and the state's largest insurer is struggling to remain solvent. Long waits for care have become increasingly common, according to state reports and interviews with residents and industry officials.

Rising health costs are a problem across the country, but Vermont's situation surprises health experts because virtually all its residents have insurance and the state regulates care and coverage prices.

For more than 15 years, federal and state policymakers have focused on increasing the number of people insured, which they expected would shore up hospital finances and make care more available and affordable.

"Vermont's struggles are a wake-up call that insurance is only one piece of the puzzle to ensuring access to care," said Keith Mueller, a rural health expert at the University of Iowa.

Regulators and consultants say the state's small, aging population of about 650,000 makes spreading insurance risk difficult. That demographic challenge is compounded by geography, as many Vermonters live in rural areas, where it's difficult to attract more health workers to address shortages.

At least part of the cost spike can be attributed to patients crossing state lines for quicker care in New York and Massachusetts. Those visits can be more expensive for both insurers and patients because of long ambulance rides and charges from out-of-network providers.

Patients who stay, like Lynne Drevik, face long waits. Drevik said her doctor told her in April that she needed knee replacement surgeries — but the earliest appointment would be in January for one knee and the following April for the other.

Drevik, 59, said it hurts to climb the stairs in the 19th-century farmhouse in Montgomery Center she and her husband operate as an inn and a spa. "My life is on hold here, and it's hard to make any plans," she said. "It's terrible."

Health experts say some of the state's health system troubles are self-inflicted.

Unlike most states, Vermont regulates hospital and insurance prices through an independent agency, the Green Mountain Care Board. Until recently, the board typically approved whatever price changes companies wanted, said Julie Wasserman, a health consultant in Vermont.

The board allowed one health system — the University of Vermont Health Network — to control about two-thirds of the state's hospital market and allowed its main facility, the University of Vermont Medical Center in Burlington, to raise its prices until it ranked among the nation's most expensive, she said, citing data the board presented in September.

Hospital officials contend their prices are no higher than industry averages.

But for 2025, the board required the University of Vermont Medical Center to cut the prices it bills private insurers by 1%.

The nonprofit system says it is navigating its own challenges. Top officials say a severe lack of housing makes it hard to recruit workers, while too few mental health providers, nursing homes, and long-term care services often create delays in discharging patients, adding to costs.

Two-thirds of the system's patients are covered by Medicare or Medicaid, said CEO Sunny Eappen. Both government programs pay providers lower rates than private insurance, which Eappen said makes it difficult to afford rising prices for drugs, medical devices, and labor.

Officials at the University of Vermont Medical Center point to several ways they are trying to adapt. They cited, for example, $9 million the hospital system has contributed to the construction of two large apartment buildings to house new workers, at a subsidized price for lower-income employees.

The hospital also has worked with community partners to open a mental health urgent care center, providing an alternative to the emergency room.

In the ER, curtains separate areas in the hallway where patients can lie on beds or gurneys for hours waiting for a room. The hospital also uses what was a storage closet as an overflow room to provide care.

"It's good to get patients into a hallway, as it's better than a chair," said Mariah McNamara, an ER doctor and associate chief medical officer with the hospital.

For the about 250 days a year when the hospital is full, doctors face pressure to discharge patients without the ideal home or community care setup, she said. "We have to go in the direction of letting you go home without patient services and giving that a try, because otherwise the hospital is going to be full of people, and that includes people that don't need to be here," McNamara said.

Searching for solutions, the Green Mountain Care Board hired a consultant who recommended a number of changes, including converting four rural hospitals into outpatient facilities, in a worst-case scenario, and consolidating specialty services at several others.

The consultant, Bruce Hamory, said in a call with reporters that his report provides a road map for Vermont, where "the healthcare system is no match for demographic, workforce, and housing challenges."

But he cautioned that any fix would require sacrifice from everyone, including patients, employers, and health providers. "There is no simple single policy solution," he said.

One place Hamory recommended converting to an outpatient center only was North Country Hospital in Newport, a village in Vermont's least populated region, known as the Northeast Kingdom.

The 25-bed hospital has lost money for years, partly because of an electronic health record system that has made it difficult to bill patients. But the hospital also has struggled to attract providers and make enough money to pay them.

Officials said they would fight any plans to close the hospital, which recently dropped several specialty services, including pulmonology, neurology, urology, and orthopedics. It doesn't have the cash to upgrade patient rooms to include bathroom doors wide enough for wheelchairs.

On a recent morning, CEO Tom Frank walked the halls of his hospital. The facility was quiet, with just 14 admitted patients and only a couple of people in the ER. "This place used to be bustling," he said of the former pulmonology clinic.

Frank said the hospital breaks even treating Medicare patients, loses money treating Medicaid patients, and makes money from a dwindling number of privately insured patients.

The state's strict regulations have earned it an antihousing, antibusiness reputation, he said. "The cost of healthcare is a symptom of a larger problem."

About 30 miles south of Newport, Andy Kehler often worries about the cost of providing health insurance to the 85 workers at Jasper Hill Farm, the cheesemaking business he co-owns.

"It's an issue every year for us, and it looks like there is no end in sight," he said.

Jasper Hill pays half the cost of its workers' health insurance premiums because that's all it can afford, Kehler said. Employees pay $1,700 a month for a family, with a $5,000 deductible.

"The coverage we provide is inadequate for what you pay," he said.

Phil Galewitz: pgalewitz@kff.org, @philgalewitz

Trump's White House Return: Healthcare Safety Net Implications

KFF Health News, November 6, 2024

Trump's victory will give a far broader platform to skeptics and critics of federal health programs and actions.

This article was published on Wednesday, November 6, 2024 in KFF Health News.

By Stephanie Armour

Former President Donald Trump's election victory and looming return to the White House will likely bring changes that scale back the nation's public health insurance programs — increasing the uninsured rate, while imposing new barriers to abortion and other reproductive care.

The reverberations will be felt far beyond Washington, D.C., and could include an erosion of the Affordable Care Act's consumer protections, the imposition of work requirements in Medicaid and funding cuts to the safety net insurance, and challenges to federal agencies that safeguard public health. Abortion restrictions may tighten nationwide with a possible effort to restrict the mailing of abortion medications.

And with the elevation of vaccine skeptic Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to Trump's inner circle of advisers, public health interventions with rigorous scientific backing — whether fluoridating public water supplies or inoculating children — could come under fire.

Trump defeated Vice President Kamala Harris with 277 Electoral College votes, The Associated Press declared at 5:34 a.m. ET on Wednesday. He won 51% of the vote nationally to Harris' 47.5%, the AP projected.

Trump's victory will give a far broader platform to skeptics and critics of federal health programs and actions. Worst case, public health authorities worry, the U.S. could see increases in preventable illnesses; a weakening of public confidence in established science; and debunked notions — such as a link between vaccines and autism — adopted as policy. Trump said in an NBC News interview on Nov. 3 that he would "make a decision" about banning some vaccines, saying he would consult with Kennedy and calling him "a very talented guy."

While Trump has said he will not try again to repeal the Affordable Care Act, his administration will face an immediate decision next year on whether to back an extension of enhanced premium subsidies for Obamacare insurance plans. Without the enhanced subsidies, steep premium increases causing lower enrollment are projected. The current uninsured rate, about 8%, would almost certainly rise.

Policy specifics have not moved far beyond the "concepts of a plan" Trump said he had during his debate with Harris, though Vice President-elect JD Vance later said the administration would seek to inject more competition into ACA marketplaces.

Republicans were projected to claim a Senate majority, in addition to the White House, while control of the House was not yet resolved early Wednesday.

Polls show the ACA has gained support among the public, including provisions such as preexisting condition protections and allowing young people to stay on family health plans until they are 26.

Trump supporters and others who have worked in his administration say the former president wants to improve the law in ways that will lower costs. They say he has already shown he will be forceful when it comes to lowering high healthcare prices, pointing to efforts during his presidency to pioneer price transparency in medical costs.

"On affordability, I'd see him building on the first term," said Brian Blase, who served as a Trump health adviser from 2017 to 2019. Relative to a Democratic administration, he said, there will be "much more focus" on "minimizing fraud and waste."

Efforts to weaken the ACA could include slashing funds for enrollment outreach, enabling consumers to purchase more health plans that don't comply with ACA consumer protections, and allowing insurers to charge sicker people higher premiums.

Democrats say they expect the worst.

"We know what their agenda is," said Leslie Dach, executive chair of Protect Our Care, a healthcare policy and advocacy organization in Washington, D.C. He worked in the Obama administration helping to implement the ACA. "They're going to raise costs for millions of Americans and rip coverage away from millions and, meanwhile, they will give tax breaks to rich people."

Theo Merkel, director of the Private Health Reform Initiative at the right-leaning Paragon Health Institute, which Blase leads, said the enhanced ACA subsidies extended by the Inflation Reduction Act in 2022 do nothing to improve plans or lower premiums. He said they paper over the plans' low value with larger government subsidies.

Other Trump supporters say the president-elect may support preserving Medicare's authority to negotiate drug prices, another provision of the IRA. Trump has championed reducing drug prices, and in 2020 advanced a test model that would have tied the prices of some drugs in Medicare to lower costs overseas, said Merkel, who worked in Trump's first White House. The drug industry successfully sued to block the program.

Within Trump's circles, some names have already been floated as possible leaders for the Department of Health and Human Services. They include former Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal and Seema Verma, who ran the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services during the Trump administration.

Kennedy, who suspended his independent presidential run and endorsed Trump, has told his supporters that Trump promised him control of HHS. Trump said publicly before Election Day that he would give Kennedy a big role in his administration, but he may have difficulty winning Senate confirmation for a Cabinet position.

While Trump has vowed to protect Medicare and said he supports funding home care benefits, he's been less specific about his intentions for Medicaid, which provides coverage to lower-income and disabled people. Some health analysts expect the program will be especially vulnerable to spending cuts, which could help finance the extension of tax breaks that expire at the end of next year.

Possible changes include the imposition of work requirements on beneficiaries in some states. The administration and Republicans in Congress could also try to revamp the way Medicaid is funded. Now, the federal government pays states a variable percentage of program costs. Conservatives have long sought to cap the federal allotments to states, which critics say would lead to draconian cuts.

"Medicaid will be a big target in a Trump administration," said Larry Levitt, executive vice president for health policy at KFF, a health information nonprofit that includes KFF Health News.

Less clear is the potential future of reproductive health rights.

Trump has said decisions about abortion restrictions should be left to the states. Thirteen states ban abortion with few exceptions, while 28 others restrict the procedure based on gestational duration, according to the Guttmacher Institute, a research and policy organization focused on advancing reproductive rights. Trump said before the election that he would not sign a national abortion ban.

State ballot measures to protect abortion rights were adopted in four states, including Missouri, which Trump won by about 18 points, according to preliminary AP reports. Abortion rights measures were rejected by voters in Florida and South Dakota.

Trump could move to restrict access to abortion medications, used in more than half of abortions, either by withdrawing the FDA's authorization for the drugs or by enforcing a 19th-century law, the Comstock Act, that abortion opponents say bans their shipment. Trump has said he generally would not use the law to ban mail delivery of the drugs.

Stephanie Armour: sarmour@kff.org, @StephArmour1

Pages