Seattle Children’s sues Texas attorney general

Seattle Children’s Hospital has filed a lawsuit against the Texas Office of the Attorney General after the agency requested documents related to gender transition policies and such care provided to Texas children, NBC affiliate KXAN reported Dec. 20.  

In a lawsuit filed Dec. 7, Seattle Children’s argues that the Texas attorney general does not have the jurisdiction to demand patient records from the hospital. It also states that Washington’s Shield Law, signed by Gov. Jay Inslee on April 27, protects it from requests made by states that “restrict or criminalize reproductive and gender-affirming care,” according to the report. 

The Shield Law creates a cause of action for interference with protected healthcare services, which protects against lawsuits filed in other states related to reproductive or gender-affirming care that is lawful in Washington. Those harmed by such out-of-state lawsuits can also file a countersuit in Washington for damages and recover their costs and attorneys’ fees.

The Texas attorney general said it is investigating misrepresentations involving gender transitioning and reassignment treatments and procedures that allegedly violated the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices-Consumer Protection Act. It has demanded that Seattle Children’s provide the following documents:

  • All medications prescribed by the hospital to Texas children
  • The number of Texas children treated by the hospital
  • Diagnosis for every medication provided by the hospital to Texas children
  • Texas labs that performed tests for the hospital before prescribing medications
  • Protocol/guidance for treating Texas children diagnosed with gender identity disorder, gender dysphoria or endocrine disorders
  • Protocol/guidance on how to “wean” a Texas child off gender transitioning care

Seattle Children’s maintains that it does not have property, accounts, nor employees who provide gender-affirming care or administrative services for that care in Texas, according to affidavits obtained by KXAN. Hospital leaders also said that Seattle Children’s has not marketed or advertised this type of care in Texas either. 

Attorneys for the hospitals argue that the demands are an “improper attempt” to enforce Texas’ SB 14 bill — signed June 2 by Gov. Greg Abbott — and investigate healthcare services that did not occur in Texas.

“Seattle Children’s took legal action to protect private patient information related to gender-affirming care services at our organization sought by the Texas attorney general,” a spokesperson for the hospital told Becker’s. “Seattle Children’s complies with the law for all healthcare services provided. Due to active litigation, we cannot comment further at this time.”

The Texas attorney general’s office did not respond to Becker’s request for comment.  

Healthcare’s trap of overqualified workers

The post-pandemic labor force has 1.5 million fewer individuals with some post-secondary education short of a bachelor’s degree. This shortfall is hitting healthcare hardest, affecting wages and qualification levels among jobholders. 

Job vacancies requiring a post-secondary certificate or associate degree, particularly in healthcare, remain high. The mismatch between the supply of workers with this education level and the ongoing demand for them is leading to increased wages and greater reliance on more educated workers, according to a December 2023 bulletin from the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City. 

Five takeaways from the bank’s report: 

1. Before the pandemic, job openings across educational groups moved together and subsequently peaked together in mid-2022. Since then, while vacancies for most groups have fallen, the number of job vacancies requiring some college education remains 60% above its pre-pandemic level. 

2. Vacancies for jobs requiring some college education are concentrated in healthcare. As of August 2023, about 50% of all open jobs posted in 2023 that required an associate degree or non-degree certificate were in healthcare.  

3. As a result of the high demand, healthcare employers are turning to more educated workers to fill positions with requirements for some college education. Healthcare employment among workers with some college education has dropped by about 400,000 since 2019; healthcare employment among workers with a bachelor’s degree or more has increased by 600,000.

4. Combined, these factors can place upward pressure on healthcare wages. The supply-demand mismatch can lead employers to offer higher wages to competitively attract qualified workers. Employers turning to workers with more education, who are generally more expensive, will increase the average wage in these occupations.

5. From 2019 to 2023, overall wages for healthcare workers rose by nearly 25%, an increase the bank partially attributes to both increased wages within educational groups and composition effects. The shift in employment toward higher-educated workers accounts for an additional 2.7 percentage points of the total wage increase, for instance. 

Will health system M&A soar or dive?

The health system deal market heated up in 2023.

Big, industry-shaking acquisitions including Oakland, Calif.-based Kaiser Permanente’s purchase of Danville, Pa.-based Geisinger, could redefine healthcare delivery with an eye toward value. Regional deals, such as Detroit-based Henry Ford Health’s planned joint venture with Ascension Michigan and St. Louis-based BJC HealthCare’s plan to acquire Saint Luke’s Health System to create a $10 billion organization, have also made waves.

There were 18 hospital and health system transactions announced in the third quarter, up from 10 transactions over the same time period in 2022, according to Kaufman Hall’s third quarter M&A report. Financial pressures with inflation catapulting staffing and supply costs, and reimbursement rates growing much more slowly, have forced some systems to look for a buyer while others aim to increase market share.

Academic health systems are also seeking community partners at a higher rate than in the past, according to the Kaufman Hall report.

But not all announced deals have gone according to plan.

The Federal Trade Commission is scrutinizing deals more closely than ever before to ensure costs don’t increase after an acquisition in some cases. In other cases, the two partners aren’t able to agree upon the details after announcing their plans. The dissolved merger between Sioux Falls, S.D.-based Sanford Health and Minneapolis-based Fairview Health Services fell apart amid contention in Minnesota, and West Des Moines, Iowa-based UnityPoint Health’s plans to merge with Presbyterian Healthcare Services in Albuquerque, N.M., was halted without a publicly stated reason.

Will there be more or fewer health system deals in the next three years?

Seth Ciabotti, CEO of MSU Health Care at Michigan State University in East Lansing, thinks so, at least when it comes to academic medical centers.

“There will be more consolidation to mitigate risk,” he told Becker’s. “I believe we are heading down a path of having only a dozen or so non-academic medical centers/health systems being left in the near future in the U.S.”

Mark Behl, president and CEO of NorthBay Health in Fairfield, Calif., has a similar outlook for the next three years.

“I suspect we will see more mergers and acquisitions with a continued desire to grow larger and remain relevant,” he told Becker’s. “Independent regional health systems will fight for relevance, and sometimes survival.”

And health systems won’t be the only buyers. Private equity, health insurers and non-traditional owners are on the hunt for health systems. General Catalyst has strengthened its healthcare presence recently and announced it plans to acquire a system in the near future.

“I believe that over the next three years, the landscape of acquisitions, divestitures and joint ventures will continue to reshape the healthcare industry,” said Dennis Sunderman, system director of HR M&A, non-employee and provider services at CommonSpirit Health, told Becker’s. “Current and proposed legislation, the continued evolution of ownership groups, nonprofit, for profit, and private equity, and the drive to hire and retain exceptionally talented teams, will lead to new innovations and an enhanced focus on the associates affected by the transaction.”

Health systems will need to optimize their operations to expand their value-based care efforts and digital transformation, including telehealth and remote patient monitoring services. Not all systems have the expertise and resources to fully make this transition, but with the right partners and strategic alignments, they can accelerate care transformation.

“There will likely be more collaborations and partnerships to expand services and increase access versus brick and mortar acquisitions,” said Cliff Megerian, MD, CEO of University Hospitals in Cleveland. “Innovative thinking is critical for success and quite frankly survival in our industry, so health systems should already be investing in growing in-house expertise dedicated to ideating new models of care, but in three years, these efforts should be producing tangible results.”

Michelle Fortune, BSN, CEO of Atrium St. Luke’s Hospital in Columbus, N.C., pointed to recent collaborations between Mercy, Microsoft and Mayo Clinic as examples of how health systems can partner on important initiatives such as improved data sharing, generative AI, digital transformation and more.

“I expect to see an increase in collaborations and connections between health systems to a degree that has never existed before as part of the focus on bringing the right care to people across the full continuum, when and where they need it,” she said.

Kaufman Hall sees more minority ownership deals ahead, which allows the smaller system to maintain near-autonomy while benefiting from the resources of a larger system.

“Health systems are also engaging in creative transaction structures that allow partners to maintain their independence while building strategic alliances that enhance access to care,” the report notes. “Announced transactions in Q3 included [Charlottesville, Va.-based] UVA Health’s acquisition of 5% ownership interest in [Newport News, Va.-based] Riverside Health System as part of a strategic alliance design ‘to expand patient access to innovative care for complex medical conditions, transplantation, and the latest clinical trials.'”

3 Philadelphia hospitals reportedly up for grabs

Three Philadelphia-based hospitals are reportedly up for sale, according to an email notice from Los Angeles-based investment bank Xnergy, The Philadelphia Inquirer reported Dec. 19.

The names of three hospitals are not confirmed. And the notice, which was obtained by the publication, did not name an owner of the hospitals. However, it did describe the hospitals’ owner as one that has acute care facilities with an average of 136 beds. 

Three Philadelphia-area hospitals fit the bed parameters in the notice: Bristol-based Lower Bucks Hospital, Philadelphia-based Roxborough Memorial Hospital, and Norristown-based Suburban Community Hospital. All three are owned by Ontario, Calif.-based Prime Healthcare Services, The Philadelphia Inquirer reported.

Roxborough and Lower Bucks were acquired by Prime in 2012, with Suburban acquired by Prime’s nonprofit affiliate Prime Healthcare Foundation in 2016. The hospitals have also seen significant annual operating loss over the last five years with a 43% combined inpatient volume drop, from 3,795 discharges in 2018 to 2,250 discharges in 2022, the publication shared.

Members of the Pennsylvania Association of Staff Nurses & Allied Professionals at both Suburban and Lower Bucks are also set to launch five-day strikes Dec. 22 due to ongoing labor contract negotiations for things like increased wages and important benefits, a union spokesperson told Becker’s.

“Prime Healthcare’s mission is to always do what’s best for our communities and patients, however, we do not comment on strategic merger and acquisition initiatives,” Elizabeth Nikels, vice president of communications and public relations for Prime Healthcare, said in an email response to Becker’s regarding the sale. 

386 hospitals now owned by private equity firms: 6 things to know

Private equity firms have drawn significant policy interest and scrutiny amid recent reports of surprise billing, rising out-of-pocket costs for patients and increased healthcare spending in the U.S., according to Health Affairs

The Private Equity Stakeholder Project has found at least 386 hospitals in the U.S. that are owned by private equity firms.

Six things to know:

1. The 386 private equity–owned hospitals represent 9% of all private hospitals and 30% of all proprietary for-profit hospitals.

2. Thirty-four percent of private equity-owned hospitals serve rural populations.

3. Texas is the state with the most private equity-owned hospitals (85).

4. While New Mexico has fewer private equity-owned hospitals (17), it has the highest proportion of private equity-backed hospitals compared to all private non-government hospitals at 43%.

5. More than 24% of private equity-owned facilities are psychiatric hospitals.

6. A few private equity firms dominate the list, according to the Private Equity Stakeholder Project:

  • Apollo Global Management (LifePoint Health (Brentwood, Tenn.) and ScionHealth (Louisville, Ky.): 177 hospitals combined)
  • Equity Group Investments (Ardent Health Services (Nashville, Tenn): 30 hospitals)
  • One Equity Partners (Ernest Health (Albuquerque, N.M.): 27 hospitals) 
  • GoldenTree Asset Management and Davidson Kempner (Quorum Health (Brentwood, Tenn.): 21 hospitals) 
  • Bain Capital (Surgery Partners (Brentwood, Tenn.): 19 hospitals)
  • Webster Equity Partners (Oceans Healthcare (Plano, Texas): 18 hospitals)
  • Patient Square Capital (Summit Behavioral Health (Franklin, Tenn.): 11 hospitals)

Indiana system to pay $345M in case tied to physician pay

Indianapolis-based Community Health Network has agreed to a $345 million settlement to resolve allegations that, dating back to 2008, it violated the False Claims Act and Stark law.

The settlement, announced Dec. 19, stems from a whistleblower complaint filed in 2014 by the nonprofit health system’s former CFO and COO under the qui tam provisions of the False Claims Act. 

The United States filed suit against CHN in 2020, alleging that the system violated the False Claims Act by knowingly submitting claims to Medicare for services that were referred in violation of the Stark law, which requires that the compensation of employed physicians be fair market value and cannot account for the volume of referrals. 

The U.S. complaint alleged that, starting in 2008, CHN’s senior management engaged in a scheme to recruit physicians for employment with outsized pay in an effort to secure profitable referrals. The salaries offered to cardiologists, cardiothoracic surgeons, vascular surgeons, neurosurgeons and breast surgeons for CHN employment were sometimes up to double what physicians earned in private practices, the complaint alleged. 

The government alleged that CHN provided false compensation information to a valuation firm, ignored the consultants’ warnings about legal risks of overcompensation and awarded bonuses to physicians based on their referrals to providers within the CHN network. 

CHN said the $345 million settlement will be paid from its reserves, which reported operating revenue of $3.1 billion in 2022. The nonprofit system has more than 200 sites of care and affiliates throughout Central Indiana, including 10 hospitals. 

“This is completely unrelated to the quality and appropriateness of the care Community provided to patients,” CHN Spokesperson Kris Kirschner said in a statement shared with Becker’s. “This settlement, like those involving other health systems and hospitals, relates to the complex, highly regulated area of physician compensation. Community has consistently prioritized the highest regulatory and ethical standards in all our business processes.” 

The system said it “has always sought to compensate employed physicians based on evolving industry best practices with the advice of independent third parties” and “has always sought to provide complete and accurate information to our third-party consultants.” 

“When doctors refer patients for CT scans, mammograms or any other medical service, those patients should know the doctor is putting their medical interests first and not their profit margins,” Zachary Myers, U.S. attorney for the Southern District of Indiana, said in the Justice Department news release. 

“Community Health Network overpaid its doctors. It also paid doctors bonuses based on the amount of extra money the hospital was able to bill Medicare through doctor referrals,” Mr. Myers said. “Such compensation arrangements erode patient trust and incentivize unnecessary medical services that waste taxpayer dollars.”  

Under the settlement, CHN will enter into a five-year corporate integrity agreement with HHS in addition to its $345 million payment to the U.S.

Jefferson, Lehigh Valley Health plan to merge into 30-hospital system

Pennsylvania health systems Jefferson and Lehigh Valley Health Network have signed a non-binding letter of intent to combine.

Philadelphia-based Jefferson and Allentown, Pa.-based LVHN announced the letter Dec. 19 in a news release, with expectations to close the transaction in 2024. Combined, Jefferson and LVHN would form a system with 30 hospitals, more than 700 sites of care and more than 62,000 employees. 

Jefferson CEO Joseph Cacchione, MD, will serve as CEO of the expanded system — dubbed for now as Jefferson Enterprise — and LVHN President and CEO Brian Nester, DO, will serve as its executive vice president and COO. Dr. Nester will also serve as president of the legacy LVHN, reporting directly to Dr. Cacchione. An integrated board of trustees and leadership team will be made up of members from both systems, specifics of which are expected in the definitive agreement.

“The healthcare landscape and our communities’ needs are changing; it is critical leading systems evolve and make investments in the future of care and wellness — growing and protecting access to enhanced, affordable, high-quality and innovative care, particularly for historically underserved patients,” Dr. Cacchione said in the release. 

The merger is another development out of Jefferson, which has seen a year of change. Dr. Cacchione assumed the CEO post in September 2022, and the system has since welcomed a new president, CFO, and dean of its medical school and physicians group. Earlier this year, Jefferson rolled out a reorganization plan to operate as three divisions instead of five, which involved layoffs affecting executives and a later workforce reduction of about 400 positions.  

Cost-cutting has been in effect at LVHN, too. The 13-hospital system, which includes nearly 3,000 physicians and advanced practice clinicians, eliminated approximately 240 positions as part of restructuring this fall. 

“In Jefferson, we have found an ideal partner that shares our culture and commitment to excellence in clinical care and a learning environment, and that has done a fabulous job in establishing a highly successful health plan with a sharp focus on the well-being of Medicaid and Medicare beneficiaries,” Dr. Nester said. “The expertise derived from these operations is becoming a crucial competency for health systems to deliver on their mission, and Jefferson Health Plans will help drive improvements in health outcomes, especially in vulnerable populations. We are also very excited about the opportunity to expand academic and talent development programs that will further bolster our provider pipeline and enhance our ability to attract and retain top talent to the benefit of the communities we both serve.”

Sweeping health reform takes a back seat for this election cycle

https://mailchi.mp/79ecc69aca80/the-weekly-gist-december-15-2023?e=d1e747d2d8

After a presentation this week, a senior physician from the audience of our member health systems reached out to discuss a well-trod topic, the future of health reform legislation. But his question led to a more forward-looking concern: 

“You talked very little about politics, even though we have an election coming up next year. Are you anticipating that Medicare for All will come up again? And what would the impact be on doctors?” 

As we’ve discussed before, we think it’s unlikely that sweeping health reform legislation like Medicare for All (M4A) would make its way through Congress, even if Democrats sweep the 2024 elections—and it’s far too early for health systems to dedicate energy to a M4A strategy.

Healthcare is not shaping up to be a campaign priority for either party, and given the levels of partisan division and expectations that slim majorities will continue, passing significant reform would be highly unlikely. 

Although there is bipartisan consensus around a limited set of issues like increasing transparency and limiting the power of PBMs, greater impact in the near term will come from regulatory, rather than legislative, action. 

For instance, health systems are much more exposed by the push toward site-neutral payments. How large is the potential hit? One mid-sized regional health system we work with estimated they stand to lose nearly $80M of annual revenue if site-neutral payments are fully implemented—catastrophic to their already slim system margins.

Preparing for this inevitable payment change or the long-term possibility of M4A both require the same strategy: serious and relentless focus on cost reduction.

This still leaves a giant elephant in the room: the long-term impact on the physician enterprise. 

As referral-based economics continue to erode, health systems will find it increasingly difficult to maintain current physician salaries, further driving the need to move beyond fee-for-service toward a health system economic model based on total cost of care and consumer value, while building physician compensation around those shared goals.

Providers threaten to leave MA networks amid contentious negotiations  

https://mailchi.mp/79ecc69aca80/the-weekly-gist-december-15-2023?e=d1e747d2d8

This week’s graphic highlights increasing tensions between health systems and Medicare Advantage (MA) plans as they battle over what providers see as unsatisfactory payment rates and insurer business practices.

On paper, many providers have negotiated rates with MA plans that are similar to traditional fee-for-service Medicare, but find MA patients are subject to more prior authorizations and denials, as well as delayed discharges to postacute care, which increases inpatient length of stay and hospital costs. 

A number of health system leaders have reported their revenue capture for MA patients dropped to roughly 80 percent of fee-for-service Medicare rates due to an increase in the mean length of stay for MA patients, caused by carriers narrowing postacute provider networks.

As a result, a growing number of health systems and medical groups have either already exited, or plan to exit, MA networks due to what they see as insufficient reimbursement. 

Health systems with a strong regional presence may be able to leverage their market share to get MA payers to play ball. But for health systems in more competitive markets, these hardline negotiation tactics run the risk of payers merely directing their patients elsewhere. 

Regardless of market dynamics, providers exiting insurance plans is extremely disruptive for patients, who won’t understand the dynamics of payer-provider negotiations—but will feel frustrated when they can’t see their preferred physicians.

For-profit hospital operators strained by physician fees, payer relations in Q3

The nation’s largest for-profit hospital systems by revenue — HCA Healthcare, Community Health Systems, Tenet Healthcare and Universal Health Services — reported mixed results during the third quarter of 2023, despite announcing strong demand for patient services.

With the exception of HCA, each operator reported lower profits in the third quarter compared with the same period last year. Health systems CHS and HCA reported earnings that fell short of Wall Street expectations for revenue.

Major operators posted declining profits in the third quarter compared to the same period in 2022

Q3 net income in millions, by operator

Health SystemProfitPercent Change YOY
Community Health Systems$−91−117%
HCA Healthcare$1,80059%
Tenet Healthcare$101−23%
Universal Health Services$167−9%

Admissions rose across the board compared to the same period last year: Same facility equivalent admissions rose 4.1% at HCA , 3.7% at CHS and 0.6% at Tenet, and adjusted admissions at acute hospitals rose 6.8% at UHS. 

Although the for-profit operators began cost containment strategies earlier this year — recognizing that rising expenses, including costs of salary and wages, were pressuring hospital profitability post-pandemic — expenses also rose, with growth in salaries and benefit costs once again pressuring most operators’ revenue.

Hospital operators faced new challenges this quarter, executives said, including increased physician staffing fees and what hospital executives characterized as aggressive behavior from payers.

Hospitals highlight rising physician fees

Rising physician fees were a topic of concern on earnings calls this quarter, with executives reporting fees that were 15% to 40% higher compared with the same period last year.

Third-party staffing firms charge hospitals physician fees, a percentage of physicians’ salaries, on top of the salaries themselves. Physician fees are separate but related to contract labor costs, which plagued hospitals during the COVID-19 pandemic as they attempted to stem staffing shortages.

Hospitals typically contract specialty hospitalist roles — like anesthesiologists, radiologists and emergency department physicians — and incur associated staffing costs.

Physician fees at HCA, the country’s largest hospital chain, grew 20% year over year in the third quarter, according to CFO Bill Rutherford.

Physician fees were up by as much as 40% at UHS — making up 7.6% of total operating expenses this quarter and surpassing the company’s initial projections for the year, CEO Marc Miller said during an earnings call. Historically, physician fees accounted for about 6% of UHS’ total expenses.

Likewise, Franklin, Tennessee-based CHS attributed some of its third-quarter losses to “increased rates for outsourced medical specialists,” according to a release on the operator’s earnings.

Tenet CEO Saum Sutaria noted that physician fee expenses were up 15% year over year, but said on an earnings call that the operator had spied rising physician fees during the pandemic, and had begun efforts to contain costs — including restructuring staffing contracts and in-sourcing critical physician services.

As a result, physician fee costs at Tenet had remained “relatively flat” from the second quarter to the third quarter this year, according to the Sutaria.

Physician fee increases may be a delayed consequence of the No Surprises Act, which went into effect in January of last year, experts say.

On an earnings call, UHS CFO Steve Filton said “the industry has largely had to reset itself” in wake of the law. Tenet and CHS executives echoed the sentiment, noting that the law had disrupted staffing firms’ business models and complicated payment processes.

The No Surprises Act prevents patients who unknowingly receive out-of-network care at an in-network facility from being stuck with unexpected bills. However, the act has had unintended ripple effects, experts say.

Staffing firms and hospitals allege that the arbitration process created to resolve disputes between providers and insurers is unbalanced and incentivizes insurers to withhold reimbursement for care. In an August survey, over half of doctors reported insurers have either ignored decisions made by arbitrators or declined to pay claims in full.

In other cases, a backlog prevents claims from being adjudicated at all. Last year, the CMS found the federal arbitration process had only reached a payment determination in 15% of cases. Federal regulators have been forced to pause and restart the arbitration process multiple times in the wake of federal court decisions challenging arbitration methodology.

Although the act went into effect more than a year ago, many hospitals are just now feeling the strain, said Loren Adler, associate director at the Brookings Institute’s Schaeffer Initiative on Health Policy.

That’s because most insurers, hospitals and medical groups operate on three-year contracts, according to Adler. Staffing firms, which have struggled since the No Surprises Act was enacted, have passed on costs to hospitals as contracts come up for negotiation and insurers charge firms higher rates.

In the face of rising costs, some hospitals may opt to follow Tenet and CHS and in-source physicians — either to retain contracts with physicians who worked with firms that have folded or because the passing of the No Surprises Act makes outsourcing less attractive.

CHS hired 500 physicians from staffing firm American Physician Partners after the company collapsed in July. CFO Kevin Hammons said on an earnings call that hiring the physicians had saved CHS “approximately $4 million sequentially compared to the subsidy payments previously paid” to the staffing firm. 

However, in-sourcing may not be an effective cost containment strategy for all operators. HCA reported it was hemorrhaging money following its first-quarter majority stake purchase of staffing firm Valesco, which brought about 5,000 physicians onto its payroll. HCA CEO Sam Hazen said the system expects to lose $50 million per quarter on the venture through 2024, citing low payments as the primary issue.

Payer problems

Hospital executives also tied quarterly losses to aggressive behavior from insurers during third-quarter earnings calls.

UHS executives said payers were improperly denying high volumes of claims and disrupting payments to its hospitals, with UHS’ Miller characterizing insurers as “increasingly aggressive” during the third quarter. Though insurers had reduced their number of claims audits, denials and patient status changes during the early stages of the pandemic, payers were increasing denials and reviews, according to UHS’ Filton.

Tenet’s Sutaria said that claims denials were “excessive and inappropriate” during a third-quarter earnings call, adding that the hospital system was working to push back on the volume of claims denials.

Their number one strategy is to provide “excellent documentation” to refute denials quickly, Sutaria said.

Still, excessive claims denials can drive up administrative costs for hospitals, according to Matthew Bates, managing director at Kaufman Hall.

“That denial creates a lot more work, because now I have to deal with that bill two, three, four times to get through the denial process,” Bates said. “It starts to rapidly eat into the operating margins… [becoming] both a cashflow problem and an administrative costs burden.”

Executives across the four for-profit operators said they planned to negotiate with insurers to receive more favorable rates and limit the number of denials in subsequent quarters.

HCA’s Hazen said that it was important for HCA to maintain its in-network status with insurers “to avoid the surprise billing and that [independent dispute resolution] process,” but that it would work with its payers to get “reasonable rates” going forward.