The Changing Definition of “Payer”

Payers have historically been the financial support for patients receiving
medical care. Through scale, predictive analytics and actuarial insights, large
insurers have been able to smoothly calibrate pricing and earnings so that
members have health coverage no matter the economic environment. Over time different insurance
products such as Medicare Advantage, managed Medicaid, Commercial insurance, and self-funded
benefits were created to provide optionality for consumers. The demand for more services under one
umbrella has resulted in six large public insurers, known collectively as the “Nationals.”
As for-profit
public entities, these organizations have utilized M&A to drive growth by acquiring smaller health
plans. This horizontal consolidation has grown membership and diversified their membership
geographically, as well as by line of business. The diversification enables these Nationals to reduce
volatility in earnings, which eases concerns of public investors, while sustaining top line growth each
year. However, with the changing tide in healthcare business models, payers have begun to look
elsewhere for new growth opportunities.


The emergence of value-based care has garnered significant interest within the healthcare
ecosystem.
Consumers of healthcare value their personalized interactions with their providers /
doctors and are typically somewhat agnostic about their payer. The payers have come to the
realization that to further drive profits, they must create stickiness with their members by aligning with
the providers that are delivering the care.
Collaboration between the payers and providers will help
increase the efficiencies in care management and drive unnecessary costs out the care delivery
process, when fully integrated. By being “closer” to the patients, payers can use the data from
providers to create valuable insights that proactively address a patient’s needs before catastrophic,
high-cost treatments are required. This trend of vertical integration, turning payers to pay-(pro)viders,
has started to play out and should be beneficial to patients, payers, providers, investors, and U.S.
healthcare as a whole.


UnitedHealthcare recently closed its $5.4 billion acquisition of LHC Group in February 2023. LHC
Group provides home health solutions and community-based care to over 12 million patients
annually in their homes. This acquisition is UnitedHealthcare’s opportunity to increase patient
engagement for the high acuity populations that LHC Group traditionally services.
UnitedHealthcare
also announced the acquisition of Amedisys, another home health and hospice provider, for $3.3
billion in 2023. UnitedHealthcare will be able to leverage the expertise from these two organizations,
while utilizing its data analytical capabilities to synchronize care efficiently and effectively. As the
U.S. population continues to age, optimizing care for seniors will be a key focal point for the
healthcare services industry.

CVS Health acquired Oak Street Health, a primary care provider that specializes in value-based
care, for $10.6 billion in 2023. This acquisition will help CVS Health address costs and patient health
in underserved communities that Oak Street Health currently services
. CVS Health also acquired
Signify Health, a technology and services company that focuses on care at home, in 2023 for $8 billion. The acquisitions of Oak Street Health and Signify Health will expand CVS Health’s healthcare delivery arm as it looks to become a one-stop shop for all patient’s needs.

As other payers see the value, both in better health outcomes and economics, created through the vertical integration of services by their competitors, they too will follow the trend. The definition of the payer will continue to evolve, and healthcare consumers will increasingly receive lower cost of care, greater accessibility to care and preferential outcomes into the future. It will be exciting to see
which pay-vider acts next and capitalizes on this opportunity.

Physician contracts are changing

Shorter contracts, noncompete agreements and increased emphasis on value-based components are among the shifts occurring in physician contracts as hospitals and medical groups build recruitment pipelines and offer incentives to retain physicians. 

Changes in how physician contracts are layered echoes a trend that has been occurring in the labor market itself. Physicians are increasingly opting for employed opportunities and contracts within those models are changing accordingly. 

From 2019 to 2021, more than 108,700 physicians left private practice for employment opportunities, with 58,200 physicians joining hospitals. About three in four physicians are now employed by hospitals, health systems, private-equity-owned groups, payers or other corporate entities. 

The rising costs of private practice, increasing administrative burdens and reimbursement hurdles are also making solo practice a challenging model for many physicians today.

Fewer large medical groups are offering salaries with production bonuses, according to an AMN Healthcare report on physician and advanced practitioner recruiting incentives. The company’s 2017 report found that 75 percent of contracts featured a salary with production bonus, while only 17 percent had a straight salary.

Some medical groups have stopped offering production bonuses because they found that the straight salary model has less ambiguity and is less likely to cause friction with physicians, according to the report. 

AMN also found that a relatively high percentage of academic medical centers do not offer the salary with production bonus model, which may account for the decline in the use of this compensation structure in its report. 

Income guarantees, which are essentially loans that must be repaid generally (but can be forgiven over time) are used to establish physicians in solo or small independent practices. Income guarantees were once the standard contract model, but as the number of private practices has declined, so has the use of income guarantees, according to the report..

Health systems continue to rethink physician contracts as healthcare continues its shift away from fee for service, but challenges remain when it comes to compensation in these models. Systems at the forefront of this shift are developing ways to incentivize physicians in value-based care as the trend towards team-based compensation gains traction and fosters collaboration among providers.

Top 6 EHRs for large hospitals, per Black Book Research

Epic was named the top EHR for acute care hospitals with 251 beds or more by Black Book Research.

The research group based its results on surveys of 18 performance indicators conducted between the second quarter of 2022 and the third quarter of 2023.

Here are the top six EHRs for large hospitals, according to the report:

1. Epic

2. Oracle Cerner

3. Altera Digital Health (Sunrise)

4. GE HealthCare

5. Altera Digital Health (Paragon)

6. Meditech

Thought of the Day: Too Few Candies Left in the Box

“I know that I have less to live than I have lived.

I feel like a child who was given a box of chocolates. He enjoys eating it, and when he sees that there is not much left, he starts to eat them with a special taste.

I have no time for endless lectures on public laws – nothing will change. And there is no desire to argue with fools who do not act according to their age. And there’s no time to battle the gray. I don’t attend meetings where egos are inflated and I can’t stand manipulators.

I am disturbed by envious people who try to vilify the most capable to grab their positions, talents and achievements.

I have too little time to discuss headlines – my soul is in a hurry.

Too few candies left in the box.

I’m interested in human people. People who laugh at their mistakes are those who are successful, who understand their calling and don’t hide from responsibility. Who defends human dignity and wants to be on the side of truth, justice, righteousness. This is what living is for.

I want to surround myself with people who know how to touch the hearts of others. Who, through the blows of fate, was able to rise and maintain the softness of the soul.

Yes, I hustle, I hustle to live with the intensity that only maturity can give. I’ll eat all the candy I have left – they’ll taste better than the ones I already ate.

My goal is to reach the end in harmony with myself, my loved ones and my conscience.

I thought I had two lives, but it turned out to be only one, and it needs to be lived with dignity.”

Brilliant Anthony Hopkins

and free interpretation of Mario de Andrade’s poem

Health systems bulk up C-suites ahead of transformation

https://www.beckershospitalreview.com/hospital-management-administration/health-systems-bulk-up-c-suites-ahead-of-transformation.html

Faced with tighter margins and continued rising costs, many health system C-suites are restructuring. At least 17 health systems have reorganized executive teams and some eliminated C-suite roles.

 The chief operating officer role in particular has been on the chopping block for health systems but not everyone is slimming down.

Some are bulking up amid organizational transformation with an eye on the future.

In June, Sutter Health in Sacramento, Calif., named Todd Smith, MD, its inaugural senior vice president and chief physician executive, responsible for supporting the health system through clinical transformation. Dr. Smith will focus on service line standards, reducing variation and strengthening the system’s relationship with medical group and community physicians.

Sutter isn’t the only system adding clinical leaders to the C-suite. Mass General Brigham in Somerville, Mass., named Erica Shenoy, MD, PhD, its first chief of infection control in June. Her expanded role is accountable for leading the integration of infection control at the system and developing and implementing infection control standards, policies and measurements. She was also appointed to the National Infection Control Advisory Committee to guide HHS earlier this year.

Meritus Health in Hagerstown, Md., added physician leadership to its executive team. Adrian Park, MD, became the system’s first chief surgical officer with responsibility for building a surgical program with advanced technology and minimally invasive procedures to the system. He is known for surgical innovation in laparoscopic techniques, and holds more than 20 patents.

MaineHealth in Portland recently added Chris Thompson, MD, to the C-suite as the system’s first chief medical transformation officer. He is responsible for chief medical officer duties as well as innovating in care delivery.

Richmond, Va.-based VCU Health and OU Health in Oklahoma City named their first chief nursing executives as well earlier this year.

Health systems are also adding strategic experts with expertise in patient experience, transformation and data analytics.

Atlanta-based Emory Healthcare created a new role for Amaka Eneanya, MD, to serve as chief transformation officer, accountable for enhancing patient and clinician experiences. She took on the role in July and is tasked with developing systemwide strategies to boost patient experience, improve access to care, increase community engagement and enrich clinician experience. Dr. Eneanya works with the system’s diversity, equity and inclusion office to prioritize strategies for health equity, diversity and inclusion in care delivery as well.

“Amaka is a forward-thinking leader who is well versed in transformational strategy and operational structure and will help us move Emory Healthcare to the next level,” said Joon S. Lee, MD, CEO of Emory Healthcare. “We look forward to working with her in our continued pursuit to transform and strengthen patient access and the patient experience.”

Last year, Centura Health in Centennial, Colo., also added a chief transformation officer, Scott Lichtenberger, MD, as a new position to balance short-term improvements and long-term value. He is responsible for ensuring the system delivers results quickly.

Finally, Cleveland Clinic has elevated another IT leader into the C-suite in recent weeks. Albert Marinez was named the system’s first chief analytics officer, set to begin his new role Aug. 28. He previously served as chief analytics officer of Intermountain Health in Salt Lake City, and will be responsible for overseeing data strategies for better patient care and lower costs at Cleveland Clinic. He will also have accountability for boosting the system’s growth alongside chief digital officer Rohit Chandra, PhD.

Health Sector Economic Indicators Briefs

https://mailchi.mp/altarum/health-sector-economic-indicators-briefs-august-2023?e=b4c24e7e20

The latest Altarum Health Sector Economic Indicators show that health spending as a percent of GDP has stabilized near 17.5%, health care price growth and economywide inflation recently converged, and the health sector added over 60,000 jobs in July. See the highlights below.

Health spending as a percent of GDP has stabilized at 17.5%

  • In June 2023, national health spending grew by 5.0%, year over year, and now represents 17.5% of GDP, equal to the average percent of GDP for the previous 12 months.
  • Nominal GDP in June 2023 was 5.8% higher than in June 2022, and grew 0.8 percentage points faster than health spending.
  • Neglecting government subsidies, spending on personal health care in June increased by 8.1%, year over year, and by 7.3% when subsidies are included, exceeding the GDP growth rate for the fifth consecutive month.
  • Neglecting government subsidies, year-over-year spending on home health care (12.2%) and nursing home care (12.0%) grew fastest in June, while physician and clinical services spending increased the least (6.9%) among major categories.
  • Personal health care growth (neglecting government subsidies), which continues to be dominated by growth in utilization rather than price increases, has slowed somewhat in the past 4 months.

Health care price growth and economywide inflation finally converge

  • The overall Health Care Price Index (HCPI) increased by 2.7% year over year in July, slowing 0.1 percentage points from the slightly revised rate in June (2.8%).
  • For the first time in over two years, health care price growth exceeded overall inflation as economywide price growth (measured by the GDP Deflator) fell to 2.6% in June, its lowest growth rate since March 2021.
  • In new data for July, overall year-over-year CPI growth actually increased slightly to 3.2%, the first increase in its growth rate since June 2022, driven primarily by changes in commodities price growth.
  • Among the major health care categories, prices for nursing home care (5.5%) and dental care (5.1%) grew fastest, while physician and clinical services (0.7%) price growth was the slowest in July.
  • Year-over-year growth in hospital prices paid by private payers fell nearly 2.5 percentage points over the past two months (from 6.1% in May to 3.7% in July), beginning to converge with public payer price growth. In July, growth in Medicare and Medicaid hospital prices reached 2.6% and 2.3% growth respectively.
  • Our implicit measure of health care utilization growth declined in June, up 4.5% year over year, and down somewhat from slightly revised data (4.9% growth) a month prior.

Health care adds 63,000 jobs in July, the largest increase since July 2022

  • Health care added 63,000 jobs in July 2023, exceeding the average of 43,700 jobs added per month for the first 6 months of the year and the largest monthly increase in the past year.
  • July’s health sector job growth was led by growth in ambulatory care settings, which added 35,400 jobs, followed by hospitals, which added 16,100 jobs.
  • Nursing and residential care facilities added 11,500 jobs in July, with growth occurring in both nursing homes (6,300 jobs) and other nursing and residential care settings (5,200 jobs).
  • The economy added 187,000 jobs in July, somewhat below the 12-month average of 280,200 jobs. The unemployment rate, at 3.5%, changed little in July.
  • Health care wage growth in June 2023 was 3.7% year over year, somewhat below the total private sector wage growth of 4.4%.
  • Wage growth in health care settings is now highest in nursing and residential care, at 4.8% year over year in June 2023. Wage growth in hospitals was 4.3%, while wage growth in ambulatory care settings was 3.0% in June.

Inside Rating Committee: Five Things to Know

Rating agencies have done a great job in increasing transparency around how ratings are determined. Detailed methodologies, scorecards, and medians are a big part of that effort.

Central to the rating process is the rating committee. All rating decisions are made by a rating committee, not an individual. The rating committee provides a robust discussion of various viewpoints as it deliberates, votes, and assigns ratings to the debt instrument.

Here are five things to know about what happens in a rating committee.

1. Rating committees are presided over by a Rating Committee Chair.

The Chair’s primary responsibility is to check that the committee follows numerous processes that meet company and SEC-mandated guidelines. For example, the Chair must verify that the correct methodology is being used to determine the rating, or if a rating requires additional methodologies (such as short-term rating methodologies on variable rate debt). The Chair must confirm that the rating decision will be based on verifiable facts or assessments (such as an audit) and that voting members are free of conflicts. Committees can be subject to internal and external reviews after the fact to ensure that decisions were made impartially and documented correctly.

The Chair ensures that the committee is populated with voting members who possess in-depth knowledge about the sector or related-credit knowledge (such as a higher education analyst in the case of an academic medical center) and are skilled in credit assessment. Each voting member has one vote and an equal vote. Serving as a voting member of a rating committee or as a Chair is a privilege and must be earned.

2. The rating committee discussion centers around the ability of a borrower to repay its obligations, or said another way, the likelihood of payment default.

As such, debt structure is integral to the rating committee. Detailed information provided in the committee package will include information on outstanding and proposed debt (if a bond financing is imminent), debt structure risks (fixed versus variable, for example), debt service schedule (level payments or with bullets), maturities and call dates, taxable and tax-exempt debt, bank lines and revolvers, counterparty risk and termination events, derivative products such as interest rate swaps and collateral thresholds, senior-subordinate debt structures, bond and bank covenants, obligated group, and security pledge, to name a few. Leases and pension obligations are also considered, particularly when liabilities outsize the direct debt.

Rating committees review hundreds of financial metrics to assess recent financial performance and an organization’s ability to pay debt in the future. Audited financial statements, year-to-date results, and annual budgets and projections are the basis for computing the financial ratios. Non-quantitative factors include success with past strategies and capital projects, market position and essentiality, management, governance and corporate structure, workforce needs, and local economic data. Confidential information provided by the organization is also shared. The job of the lead analyst is to distill all the information and present an organized credit story to the rating committee.

3. Rating consistency is paramount.

An “A” should be an “A” should be an “A.” Comparables (or “comps”) are an important part of the rating committee. Comps may include the other hospitals and health systems operating in the same state given shared Medicaid and state regulations (such as Certificate of Need or state-mandated minimum wage), workforce environment (such as the presence of active unions), and similar economic factors. Like-sized peers in the same rating category also populate comps. The type of hospital being evaluated is also important. For example, health systems that own health plans would be compared to other integrated delivery systems; likewise for children’s hospitals, academic medical centers, or subacute care providers. Medians are also a part of the comps and provide relativity to like-rated borrowers by highlighting outliers.

4. Rating committee spends time reviewing the draft report to make sure the committee’s views are accurately expressed and check that confidential information was not inadvertently revealed. If you want to know what was discussed in the rating committee, read the last rating report.

Over the years, many executives have asked to speak directly to the rating committee. While that is not possible, you can bring your voice to the discussion with an informative, well-crafted rating presentation. That brings me to my final “inside rating committee” point.

5. Rating presentations matter.

Effective, informative presentations that encapsulate your organization’s strengths will be shared with the rating committee. Every slide in your presentation should send a clear message that the organization’s ability to repay the debt and exceed covenants is strong. Emphasize the positives, acknowledge the challenges, and share what your action plan is to address them. Do your homework and review what you shared with the analysts last year; they will be doing the same to prepare. Provide updates on how the strategic plans are going. If you exceeded your financial goals, explain how. If you fell short, explain why.

How you tell the story is as important as the story itself. That’s how you can inform the discussion and ensure your voice is heard around the rating committee table.

Hospitals are in a world of denial

Hospital and insurer contract negotiations are often framed as an industry gauntlet, a defined period of time with an objective outcome where big talk does not translate to money. But reimbursement rates secured in new contracts are only one piece of hospitals’ payer-induced headaches.

Traditionally, a health system and commercial insurer would occasionally run into a wall in the contract negotiation process. This could play out into a dispute palpable enough to consumers that it warranted headlines. These impasses generally lasted a matter of weeks with no significant disruptions before outside pressure drove the parties to compromise. 

Over the past five years or so, the nature of provider-payer conflicts intensified and may be on the cusp of unprecedented severity given health systems’ financial pressures. At the same time, agreed-upon reimbursement rates are only the tip of the iceberg when it comes to payment health systems can expect from commercial insurers, who have many more defensive plays in their playbook. 

They boil down to a classic line from a 1968 movie: deny, deny, deny. 

Russ Johnson is CEO of LMH Health, a 102-year-old, independent, nonprofit health system based in Lawrence, Kan. The $350 million organization is anchored by a 174-bed hospital. As he puts it: “We’re not tiny, but we’re not very big.”

Mr. Johnson has spent 37 years working in healthcare, holding senior leadership positions in hospitals and health systems in rural communities and large cities. It’s difficult to identify many things going well when it comes to provider-payer relationships, but Mr. Johnson told Becker’s that it’s the payer movements beneath the reimbursement rates that are worsening and causing greater pain today.

“The part that’s getting worse is the practices behind and underneath the contracts — the sophistication and implementation of pay practices, information systems, artificial intelligence and computer algorithms that are just denying claims by the thousands every month,” he said.

The reimbursement rates secured in contracts are what you can see above water. Beneath, health insurers are moving faster and kicking harder. Throughout the first three months of 2023, about one-third of inpatient and outpatient claims submitted by providers to commercial payers went unpaid for more than 90 days, according to an analysis from Crowe. 

“So many more claims are now surfacing with some kind of a fallout on a denial, a downcoding or a pre-authorization — you know, the proverbial dotting the i’s and crossing the t’s, sometimes. But what is abundantly clear is it is not fundamentally about a clinical difference,” Mr. Johnson said. 

Denials were once reserved for a sliver of expensive treatments and have now become common occurrence for mundane, ordinary medical care and treatments such as inhalers or familiar medications for chronic conditions a patient has managed for years. The administrative burden is something close to a requirement to prove residency every month to receive electricity or verifying eligibility to work in the U.S. every week for a paycheck — redundant, time-wasting activity for ordinary, essential things. 

“For our business office to keep up with what I frankly think is mischief by the payers in terms of denials, pre-authorization, DRG downcoding and a completely unengaged experience trying to negotiate — or to have our physicians call in and do a peer-to-peer conferences about clinical necessity — it’s demoralizing, frankly,” Mr. Johnson said. “Dealing with denial from our payers is one of the biggest dissatisfiers our physicians face.”

Authors of the 2010 Affordable Care Act worried that provisions to expand health insurance access — such as barring health insurers’ refusal to cover patients with preexisting conditions — could cause them to ratchet up other tactics to make up for the change. With this in mind, the law charged HHS with monitoring health plan denial rates, but oversight has been unfulfilled, leaving denials widespread. 

Data and numbers on denial rates are not easy to find, but some examination paints a picture rich with variation. An analysis of 2021 plans on Healthcare.gov conducted by KFF found nearly 17 percent of in-network claims were denied, with rates varying from 2 percent to 49 percent. The reasons for the bulk of denials are unclear. About 14 percent were attributed to an excluded service, 8 percent to lack of pre-authorization or referral and 2 percent to questions of medical necessity. A whopping 77 percent were classified as “all other reasons.” 

Adding to the inconsistency is the fact that health plan denial rates fluctuate year over year. In 2020, a gold-level health plan offered by Oscar Insurance in Florida denied 66 percent of payment requests; in 2021 it denied 7 percent.

There is much to learn about the ways AI will shape healthcare, and its potential to further expedite and increase denials is concerning. Cigna faces a class-action lawsuit alleging it bypassed requirements for claim review before denial by having an algorithm — dubbed “PXDX” — complete review before having physicians sign off on batches of denied claims. The lawsuit followed a ProPublica report on the practice, which said Cigna physicians denied more than 300,000 claims over two months in 2022 through the system, which equated to 1.2 seconds of review per claim on average.

AI is often touted as a potential, looming replacement to hardworking healthcare professionals, but in the day to day it exacerbates the administrative burdens that already bring them down.  

“Nobody becomes a physician because they hope to feel like a cog in a factory,” Michael Ivy, MD, deputy chief medical officer of Yale New Haven (Conn.) Health, told Becker’s. “However, between meeting the demands of payers for referrals, denials of payment and increased documentation requirements in order to assure proper reimbursement and risk adjustment, as well as an increasing number of production metrics, it can be difficult not to feel like a cog.”