Selective Contracting

The Iron triangle for healthcare consists of cost, quality, and access; these three characteristics when balanced create great healthcare. Managed Care Organizations combine the three to offer consumers with care that is appropriate for their individual needs. Our book describes managed care organizations as “the cost management of healthcare services by controlling who the consumer sees and how much the service cost” (Basics of the U.S Healthcare System, Niles). Taking a look at the history prior to the Health Maintenance Organization Act of 1973 (HMO ACT of 1973) the implementation has been significant in balancing cost, and quality control. Before this Act was signed in to law by President Nixon healthcare costs were determined by fee for service. A fee for service or indemnity plan is a plan that allows the provider to determine the cost of service, this fee for service plan caused for healthcare costs to increase rapidly. An example of this would be going to the doctor with neck pain, being told to stretch then receiving a bill for 25,000 dollars. As could be understood the cost of healthcare had became a problem.

The PHO served as a vehicle through which competing hospitals and physicians could bargain collectively with health plans to obtain higher fees for themselves. The owner PHOs, member hospitals, and member physicians canceled contracts with payors and informed them that the PHO would be the sole entity through which they would enter into payor contracts. To contract with the PHO, payors allegedly have had to accept the fixed physician fee schedule and fixed discount of no more than 10 percent off hospital list prices.

“the contractor shall further insure that all medical, dental, and mental health services are secured from a Medicaid approved provider and that charges for services shall be at the Medicaid approved rates. If no Medicaid provider is available the contractor must make every

Since 1984, Medicare patients have been serviced under the prospective payment system of the Medicare program. Under this system, primary care providers are reimbursed for their services using a fixed payment for each patient that is determined by the patient’s diagnosis-related group at the time of the admission. Therefore, under the prospective payment system a hospital’s reimbursement is unaffected by the actual expenditures that are required to care for a patient.

When evaluating a provider's location for accessibility, managed care organizations consider the distance between the provider's location and members, as well as geographical barriers. It is not the intent of a managed care organizations to expend long trips to physicians or hospitals for medical care. For each provider type, the organization also examines typical patterns of utilization and average costs for selected services. Baker comments, "Defining a panel offers managed care plans the advantage of selecting providers with whom they are interested in working as well as the potential to obtain some contracting advantages through which they can sometimes obtain discounts from physicians who would like to be included in the panel" (Baker, 2000, p.3).

Contrary to this, anecdotal reports stated that other clinicians sometimes spend more times in checking and treating patients with severe illnesses or who are in critical conditions, which made the physicians care for a greater number of patients with lower acuity. Whenever a physician and clinician bill for the same service, it is very difficult to tell if the physician saw a more complex patient. Due to these uncertainties in comparing their services, the Commission is reluctant in altering the payment differential. From that discussion, every provider must be familiar with some fundamentals about Medicare. First and foremost, there is Medicare Part A, which actually covers skilled nursing home, hospital, and home health charges; and then there is Medicare Part B, which then envelops most outpatient services, the care that patients in particular obtain from a doctor’s office (Fishman, 2002).

“a) Contracts that explicitly detail the responsibilities of employers as purchasers with insurance, managed care, and hospitals and physician groups as suppliers, b) Information to support the management of purchasing activities, c) Quality management to drive continuous improvement in the process of healthcare purchasing and in the delivery of healthcare services, d) Incentives to encourage and reward consumers, and e) Education to assist employees become better healthcare consumers” (p. 352).

The healthcare system in the United States is a system composed of many private insurance companies who act independently from one another. These companies make their money through premiums which are paid by the insured; therefore a major part of the healthcare system is privately funded. This type of market is considered to be an imperfect market because it does not meet the true requirements of a free market where there is unrestrained competition between providers. In our healthcare system there is an absence of a central agency to govern healthcare. There are multiple payers and third party insurers serving as intermediaries between financing and the delivery of healthcare. The United States has a multi-payer, heavily private system in which thousands of private insurance companies are responsible for paying some claims, while federal and state

On April seventh of this year, the California health marketplace announced they would began to reform its contracts with insurers. They plan on applying quality and cost standards on health plans, hospitals, and doctors. Over seven years, Covered California, the name of the exchange, will evaluate poor performing health care providers that do not meet standard core measures, overcharging for services, and other quality metrics. If the health care providers fail to meet these standards, they could have their payments docked at least six percent and/or dropped from the network. If standards are met or exceeded, bonuses would be given. Opponents to the new reform caution that such harsh treatment could lead to a

The HRSA allowed those eligible entities, even those with in-house pharmacies to contract with outside pharmacies, “In one year, from April 2010- April 2011, the number of contract pharmacy arrangements grew by 161 percent. Based on historical contract adoption rates, by 2019, 90% of DSH hospitals will have contracts with pharmacies as part of their 340B operations. Since, DSH hospitals account for 81 percent of total 340B sales; they will be the primary driver of 340B utilization growth through contract pharmacies,” (Vandervelde, 2014, & Avalere Health, 2011). Pharmacy expansion contracts were supposed to help small clinics without their own in-house pharmacy, but, it seems all 340Be entities are benefiting even the large non-profit hospitals. Hence, those clinics that are treating the uninsured and indigent are not truly the entities benefitting from the

of gag clauses in contracts amongst the MCOs and their providers. These clauses limit providers

Health maintenance organization’s (HMOs) use of the primary care physician (PCP) as the “gatekeeper” initially had MCOs view restrictions as a negative approach to patients’ choices. However, some necessary steps have started to be implemented which reduce unnecessary utilization by enforcing some restrictions.

The external stakeholders are the community, patients, MedKey System members, CMS, HMOs (ie. Blue Cross Blue Shield and Tri-Care), and any other private insurances (Richards & Slovensky, 2004). Medicare reimbursement in Alabama was the lowest rate in the nation. This was a constant struggle for the hospital administrators to try to operate on such low reimbursements for their services, which is a threat. Eighty percent of patients were Medicare or Blue Cross in which there was difficulty-negotiating prices with Blue Cross due to monopoly. Buyers have high bargaining power as reimbursements rates are low from Medicare and Blue Cross held monopoly in the services area so negotiating prices was difficult. Suppliers have lower bargaining power due to low Medicare reimbursements and difficulty negotiating prices with Blue

Managed care was established in order to manage health care cost, utilization, and quality (Kongstvedt, 2015). In managed care, health insurance is provided through HMO, PPO, and other types of managed care. It has the potential to reduced health care spending and improved the quality of care. However, despite of its success in improving the quality of care through preventive health care services, chronic disease management program, and so forth, many physicians are reluctant to be part of the managed care environment. Some of the reasons are the impact of managed care to physician’s income and autonomy. Under managed care, insurers have decreased the fees paid to physicians. There are different ways how managed care organizations control costs. One of this is through selective contracting with health care providers and hospitals to lower costs. In selective contracting, health care providers agreed to accept lower prices in exchanged for guaranteed volume of patients under managed care plan (Culyer, 2014). This paper will discuss more issues and trends in Managed Care Organizations such as the rise of Medicaid Managed Care spending, the new Medicaid Managed care Rule, and the collaboration of Managed Care Organizations and Accountable Care Organizations to reduce health care spending and improve efficiency of care.

Under capitation, physicians are given incentive to consider the cost of treatment. Pure capitation pays a set fee per patient, regardless of their degree of infirmity, and gives physicians an incentive to avoid the most costly patients (Miller, 2009). Providers who work under such plans focus on preventive health care, as there is greater financial reward in prevention of illness than in treatment of the ill. Such plans avert providers from the use of expensive treatment options. The proponents of this method of payment especially insurance companies argue that when health care providers are not paid extra for additional office visits any associated medical expenses, they are likely to be more conservative with their treatment assessments