News, Analysis, Trends, Management Innovations for
Clinical Laboratories and Pathology Groups

Hosted by Robert Michel

News, Analysis, Trends, Management Innovations for
Clinical Laboratories and Pathology Groups

Hosted by Robert Michel
Sign In

Study Comparing Data from Hospitals and Insurers Finds Major Hospitals Still Not Complying with Price Transparency Law

But insurers are complying under the Transparency in Coverage regulations and that is where discrepancies in the disclosure of prices to the public have been found

Despite federal regulations requiring hospitals to publicly post their prices in advance of patient services, some large health systems still do not follow the law. That’s according to a new Transparency in Coverage Report from PatientRightsAdvocate.org (PRA), which found that some hospitals are “flouting” the federal Hospital Price Transparency Rule.

By cross-referencing price disclosures by hospitals and insurance companies, which are required to publish the amounts they pay for hospital services under federal Transparency in Coverage regulations, PRA, a 501(c)(3) nonprofit, nonpartisan organization, discovered the healthcare providers’ noncompliance with federal transparency regulation.

“Prices revealed in newly released health insurance company data files show some major American hospitals are omitting prices from their required price disclosures in violation of the federal hospital price transparency rule,” according to the PRA report.

Sally C. Pipes

Hospitals conceal their prices because they don’t want people to know how much rates for the same procedure vary,” Sally C. Pipes (above), President and CEO of Pacific Research Institute, wrote in the Washington Examiner. “A lack of price transparency benefits hospitals but not patients or payers. The federal government should not let providers get away with flouting the law,” she added. Clinical laboratories are also required under federal law to publish their prices. (Photo copyright: The Heartland Institute.)

Prices Paid by Insurers Missing in Hospital Files

PRA analysts compared publicly available Standard Charge File (SCF) data from seven Ascension Health and HCA Healthcare hospitals in Texas and Florida, and Transparency in Coverage disclosures from Blue Cross Blue Shield, Cigna, and UnitedHealthcare.

“PatientRightsAdvocate.org discovered several instances in which prices were omitted from the hospital files but appeared in the insurance company files,” noted the PRA report. “These discrepancies indicate that some large hospitals are not posting their complete price lists as required by the hospital price transparency rule.”

The federal Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) says hospitals must post standard charges in a single machine-readable digital file, and display in a consumer-friendly way, “300 shoppable services with discounted cash prices, payer-specific negotiated charges, and de-identified minimum and maximum negotiated charges.”

But according to the PRA report and news release, the study team discovered that this was not always the case. Below are examples from the report of some of the discrepancies between prices on a hospital’s website and what payers’ websites showed as prices involving those same hospitals:

Ascension Seton Medical Center, Austin, Texas:

  • The hospital SCF for shoppable services showed “N/A” (not available).
  • UnitedHealthcare files included 16 rates it negotiated by plan and BCBS shared 12 prices by plan.

Ascension St. Vincent’s Clay County Hospital, Middleburg, Florida:

  • The hospital’s SCF “did not contain negotiated rates” for services by Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes.
  • UnitedHealthcare showed negotiated rates for 69 CPT codes.

HCA Florida Northside Hospital, St. Petersburg, Florida:

  • PRA analysts found in the hospital SCF file “a range of 300 codes” and “one single negotiated rate.”
  • The insurer, meanwhile, displayed “many different rates corresponding to 300+ codes in the range.”

HCA Houston Healthcare Clear Lake, Webster, Texas:

HCA Medical City, Fort Worth, Texas:

  • The provider displayed in its SCF “one distinct dollar price for all 62 MS-DRG codes that appeared as a group.”
  • BCBS of Texas Blue Premier plan displayed 58 distinct negotiated rates for the codes in that group.

The report also summarized findings for:

PRA’s report casts light on inconsistencies between what insurers and providers share with the public on prices.

“Today’s report confirms that hospitals are hiding prices from patients and [this] calls into question their public assertions that individual prices don’t exist for many of the services they provide,” said PRA Founder and Chairman Cynthia Fisher in the news release.

“The data made possible by the [federal] Transparency in Coverage (TiC) rule reveals prices negotiated with insurers that hospitals did not disclose in the machine-readable files required by law. Our report is just the tip of the iceberg of what the staggering amount of data in TiC disclosures will reveal,” she added.

Ascension, HCA Note Compliance with CMS Rule

For its part, Ascension, in a statement to Healthcare Dive, confirmed it is complying with the CMS rule and offers consumers tools to estimate costs.

“We’re proud to be a leader in price transparency,” Ascension said.

HCA told Healthcare Dive it has “implemented federal transparency requirements in January 2021 and provides a patient payment estimator in addition to posting third-party contracted rates.”

Advice for Clinical Laboratories Sharing Test Prices

Hospitals flouting the federal transparency rule is not new. Dark Daily has covered other similar incidences.

In “Two Georgia Hospitals First to Be Fined by CMS for Failure to Comply with Hospital Price Transparency Law,” we reported how CMS had issued its first penalties to two hospitals located in Georgia for violating the law by not updating their websites or replying to the agency’s warning letters.

And in “Wall Street Journal Investigation Finds Computer Code on Hospitals’ Websites That Prevents Prices from Being Shown by Internet Search Engines, Circumventing Federal Price Transparency Laws,” we covered the Wall Street Journal’s report on “hundreds of hospitals” that had “embed code in their websites that prevented Alphabet Inc.’s Google and other search engines from displaying pages with the price lists.”

Clinical laboratory leaders who oversee multiple labs in healthcare systems may benefit from advice about CMS rule compliance shared in HealthLeaders.

  • Post a separate file for each provider.
  • Be “cognizant” of different sets of standard charges for multiple hospitals under one license.

“Today’s healthcare consumer wants to know prices in advance of service. That’s because many have high deductible health insurance plans of, say, $5,000 for an individual or $10,000 for a family as the annual deductible,” said Robert Michel, Editor-in-Chief of Dark Daily and its sister publication The Dark Report.

Clinical laboratory tests may not be the most expensive healthcare service. But they are critical for high-quality hospital care and outcomes. Increasingly, patients want to know in advance how much they will cost. This is true of patients of all generations, from Baby Boomers to Generations X, Y, and Z.

Donna Marie Pocius

Related Information:

PRA New Report: Insurance Pricing Files Reveal That Hospitals are Hiding Prices

Transparency in Coverage

Hospitals Are Still Hiding Costs

Hospitals Are Hiding Prices from Patients, Advocacy Report Says

Large Health Systems Are Being Called Out for Lack of Price Transparency

Two Georgia Hospitals First to Be Fined by CMS for Failure to Comply with Hospital Price Transparency Law

HHS Office of Inspector General Report Finds ‘Steep Decreases’ in Medicare Beneficiaries Receiving Clinical Laboratory Testing During COVID-19 Pandemic’s Early Months

OIG warns that without adequate clinical laboratory testing healthcare organizations could see more deaths and increased spending

Clinical laboratory leaders and pathologists know that lab test volume decreased dramatically during the early months of the COVID-19 pandemic. That was primarily because community lockdowns stopped people from seeing their doctors for the standard range of chronic health conditions, many of which require clinical laboratory tests for diagnosis and chronic disease management.

This early and substantial drop in the volume of medical laboratory testing done in the early months of the pandemic has been confirmed and quantified in a recently published report by US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Office of Inspector General (OIG). The report describes the  “steep decreases” in the number of Medicare beneficiaries receiving Medicare Part B lab tests in early 2020, by month, as follows:

• 24% reduction in Medicare Part B test volumes in March
• 53% in April
• 30% in May

The decline of Medicare patients visiting clinical laboratories continued through the balance of 2020. During the first 10 months of the pandemic—March through December 2020—Medicare beneficiaries who pursued lab testing decreased by about 9% compared to the same 10-month period in 2019, according to a news release.

This is a strong indicator that the government’s response to the pandemic had a measurable effect on clinical laboratory testing volume among all age groups, especially among the elderly.

Kyle Fetter

“The cumulative decline in lab test volume across all client labs for [March 9 to April 12] was just over 40%. But in that time, some of our lab customers were hit with a decline of maybe 50% to 60% in test volume,” Kyle Fetter (above), COO, XIFIN, told The Dark Report in 2020. Clinical laboratory testing that originates from a routine patient visit to a doctor—such as blood testing—may have been affected the most, Fetter explained. (Photo copyright: XIFIN.)

Clinical Laboratory Tests Key to Well-being of Patients with Chronic Conditions 

The OIG study was limited to Medicare beneficiaries and thus did not provide information about testing fall-off among people who have private health insurance. But in “From Mid-March, Labs Saw Big Drop in Revenue,” Dark Daily’s sister publication The Dark Report reported early in 2020 on a 40% decline in test volumes and the pandemic’s varying effects on clinical labs, anatomic pathology (AP) groups, and AP subspecialties.

The OIG’s Report in Brief on its study recognized that medical laboratory testing is critical to helping healthcare providers manage chronic conditions that affect patients’ well-being and increase their healthcare costs.

“Lab tests are important for beneficiaries with chronic medical conditions, which are associated with hospitalizations, billions of dollars in Medicare costs, and deaths,” the OIG said.

The OIG audit collected data on the numbers of Medicare beneficiaries receiving all lab tests as well as specific lab tests for Type 2 diabetes mellitus, Chronic kidney disease, and Chronic ischemic heart disease during the period March through December 2020, as compared to the same months in 2019.

According to the OIG’s report:

  • Beneficiaries receiving clinical laboratory tests in general decreased 9%.
  • Beneficiaries with type 2 diabetes receiving lab tests declined 14%.
  • Beneficiaries with chronic kidney disease getting lab tests fell 11%.
  • Beneficiaries with chronic ischemic heart disease receiving lab tests decreased 19%.

“The information may be useful to stakeholders involved in ensuring that beneficiaries avoid the potential bad outcomes that may result from missing or delaying appropriate care,” the report noted.

Overall, 23.7 million Medicare beneficiaries received medical laboratory tests during the first 10 months of the pandemic, down 2.4 million from 26.1 million in 2019, the OIG reported.

Overall Medicare lab test volume and spending also declined during the reported period:

  • Part B clinical laboratory tests for Medicare beneficiaries decreased 15% from 419.9 million tests in 2019 to 358.4 million tests in the first 10 months of the pandemic.
  • Medicare spending for these tests decreased 16% from $6.6 billion in 2019 to $5.5 billion during the first 10 months of the pandemic.

“OIG’s audit of Part B clinical laboratory tests, reimbursed under the Clinical Laboratory Fee Schedule (CLFS) is a useful benchmark for how Medicare beneficiaries received fewer lab tests during the pandemic, especially during the early months,” said Robert Michel, Editor-in-Chief of Dark Daily and The Dark Report.

Medical Laboratory Tests That Were Down Most During COVID-19

The following 10 clinical laboratory tests experienced a 10% or more decline in Medicare beneficiaries seeking them during the pandemic period as compared to pre-pandemic, according to the OIG report:

  • Basic metabolic panel down 18% to 4.8 million Medicare patients.
  • Urinalysis with microscope analysis down 13% to 4.6 million Medicare recipients.
  • Automated urinalysis down 16% to 3.4 million Medicare beneficiaries.
  • Vitamin B12 decreased 11% to 3.4 million Medicare patients.
  • Complete blood count (CBC) down 13% to 3.2 million Medicare beneficiaries.
  • Comprehensive urine culture test fell 16% to three million Medicare patients.
  • Uric acid level blood down 13% to 1.9 million Medicare beneficiaries.
  • Evaluation of antimicrobial drug decreased 17% to 1.74 million Medicare patients.
  • Folic acid level down 12% to 1.73 million Medicare beneficiaries.
  • Urinalysis manual test plunged 28% to 1.4 million Medicare patients.

Beyond Medicare, Clinical Laboratory Test Volume Dropped 40%

OIG was not the only organization to analyze medical laboratory testing volume during the pandemic’s early phase.

The Dark Report correlated data tracked by XIFIN, a San Diego-based health information technology (HIT) company providing revenue cycle management services to clinical laboratories and pathology groups. XIFIN’s collected data showed a steep drop in routine test volume as COVID-19 testing ramped up.

“Starting in the third week of March, we saw medical laboratories suffer a sharp drop in routine testing. But at about the same time, many labs began to offset those revenue losses with testing for the novel coronavirus,” Kyle Fetter, XIFIN’s then Executive Vice President and General Manager of Diagnostic Services told The Dark Report in 2020. Fetter is now XIFIN’S Chief Operating Officer.

“Over four weeks beginning March 9, we saw a cumulative drop of over 40% in test volume from all of our lab clients,” he added.

According to XIFIN’s data, lab specialty organizations experienced the following drop in routine testing during the period March 9 to April 16, 2020:

  • 58% at clinical laboratories.
  • 61% at hospital outreach laboratories.
  • 52% at molecular and genetic testing laboratories.
  • 44% at anatomic pathology (AP) groups.
  • 70% to 80% at AP dermatology and other AP subspecialties.

Many medical laboratories are still recovering from the COVID-19 pandemic’s effects on testing volume.

Notably, the OIG’s report acknowledges the importance of adequate clinical laboratory testing and declares that—without these essential lab tests to manage some healthcare conditions—the healthcare industry could see increased morbidity, deaths, and Medicare spending.   

Donna Marie Pocius

Related Information:

Full Report: The Number of Beneficiaries Who Received Medicare Part B Clinical Laboratory Tests Decreased During the First 10 Months of the COVID-19 Pandemic

Press Release: The Number of Beneficiaries Who Received Medicare Part B Clinical Laboratory Tests Decreased During the First 10 Months of the COVID-19 Pandemic 

Report-in-Brief: The Number of Beneficiaries Who Received Medicare Part B Clinical Laboratory Tests Decreased During the First 10 Months of the COVID-19 Pandemic

From Mid-March Labs Saw Big Drop in Revenue

Vitals Study Shows Consumers Using Cost Transparency Tools Select Clinical Laboratories with Low Test Prices

Researchers find shopping for medical laboratory tests increased by nearly 50%, and people are saving more than a million dollars annually by shopping for blood tests

Each year, more consumers use online healthcare price-shopping tools to find hospitals, physicians, and clinical laboratories that have the lowest prices. And medical laboratory tests is among the top services on their lists!

Researchers at Vitals of Lyndhurst, NJ, a company that publishes online physician ratings, analyzed how consumers were using its price and quality transparency tools. They confirmed that shopping for medical laboratory tests/blood work is one of the top healthcare procedures checked by consumers.

According to a recent Vitals press release, approximately 46% more people shopped for blood tests in 2015 than the year before, and they saved $1,149,682 by doing so. That’s because their health plans reward them for selecting good quality and low-price providers, as well as adopting healthy behaviors, such as losing weight, exercising more, and lowering high cholesterol scores. (more…)

Texas Section of the American Association of Clinical Chemistry Hosts All-Star Line-up of Clinical Laboratory Experts to Share Successes at Improving Lab Test Utilization

Innovative medical laboratories are developing ways to deliver more value to physicians ordering and using lab tests

TEMPLE, TEXAS—Changes now happening to healthcare and the practice of medical laboratory medicine were upfront and personal here during last Friday’s meeting of the Texas Section of the American Association of Clinical Chemistry (AACC).

An impressive crowd of more than 120 pathologists, Ph.D.s, and clinical laboratory professionals were present to learn from an all-star panel of lab industry innovators. Space does not allow a full report of all 10 speakers who addressed this conference, but a nugget or two from three of the morning speakers will illustrate some of the latest thinking on how medical laboratories and pathology groups can make the transition from a transactional business model (fee-for-service payment) to a value-added clinical model (bundled or shared per-patient-per-month fee).

After an opening presentation by your Dark Daily editor, Robert L. Michel, who identified the primary dynamics propelling healthcare’s transformation, the next speaker launched into the key issue associated with how clinical labs and pathology groups can deliver value. (more…)

Study at Boston’s Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center Determines that 30% of All Clinical Laboratory Tests Are Overused or Medically Unnecessary

BIDMC researchers show that, on average, 30% of all lab tests may be unnecessary and that an equal percentage of tests should not be ordered at all

Every pathologist and clinical laboratory professional knows how often physicians order a medical laboratory test that is inappropriate or unnecessary. That is a problem because, each time a clinician orders an inappropriate test, patient harm is possible. Yet this issue gets little attention from the medical profession at large.

Thus, it is significant that researchers at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center (BIDMC), published a study last fall showing that 30% of all medical laboratory tests throughout medicine are overused! A different 30% of medical laboratory tests are underused, as well. (more…)

;