Ascension could shift away from hospital focus, Modern Healthcare finds

https://www.healthcaredive.com/news/ascension-restructuring-modern/519850/

Image result for healthcare transformation

Dive Brief:

  • Ascension is restructuring to adapt a new strategic direction. President and CEO Anthony Tersigni hinted that direction would put a larger emphasis on outpatient access points and telemedicine, according to a video obtained by Modern Healthcare. The effort could move Ascension away from being a hospital-focused business.
  • The board of directors has endorsed the new direction and the company expects to save $57 million a year by streamlining its pay practices, Tersigni reportedly said in the video.
  • The 151-hospital system has realigned leadership and organizational efforts, including limiting business travel and holding virtual meetings as Tersigni and his direct reports take pay cuts. Such efforts are expected to save $61 million in fiscal 2019, Modern Healthcare’s Alex Kacik reported.

Dive Insight:

The news comes as the industry is questioning whether the days of large hospital-based health systems are numbered.

Tenet Healthcare and Community Health Systems are both shedding hospitals as they seek to reduce debt loads that were $15 billion at their peaks. Tenet, also in restructuring mode, raised its number of layoffs to 2,000 to help reduce its debt.

Ascension recently laid off 500 workers in Michigan and more could be on the way. It’s restructuring shouldn’t be a surprise. The company’s operating income dropped 93% in Q1 2018 to $11.5 million, compared to $172.6 million the previous year. The operating revenue dropped $122.1 million over the last half of 2017.

Admissions for many health systems have been trending downward as expenses have risen. In efforts to make numbers work, health systems are exploring outpatient access points while focusing on geographic areas they believe they can become market leaders in and where higher-revenue-yield services are more in demand.

This has led to large systems questioning whether they want to still be large.

However, no one is waving the white flag just yet and pivoting away from a “strength by numbers” system approach. The restructuring news comes as Ascension and Presence Health signed a definitive agreement for Presence to join Ascension and become part of AMITA Health, a joint venture between Ascension’s Alexian Brothers Health System and Adventist Midwest Health.

The system is also rumored to be in merger talks with Providence St. Joseph Health that surfaced in December.

HCA, which is bullish on inpatient facilities and saw rising admissions last year, is exploring a possible acquisition of Mission Health.

The industry is in a state of change, and it’s yet to be seen how the multiple restructurings shake out. But smaller, regional-focused systems look to be one option as the large systems sell parts of themselves off.

http://www.modernhealthcare.com/article/20180322/NEWS/180329953/ascension-amid-major-restructuring-hinting-at-smaller-hospital

 

Hospitals acquired 5,000 physician practices in a single year

http://www.healthcarefinancenews.com/news/hospitals-acquired-5000-physician-practices-single-year?mkt_tok=eyJpIjoiTXpFeU1qUTJPR00yWm1FeiIsInQiOiJiZTRrblwvWEVKWVZmVWFoanhPRFRpcFFwa3JHQUI4eGpRdCs4b0NOOVJFc1I5M2kxNlIwYnFmVHVFb3Viem5BaHg4RE91amVpT2xBMUxRWEdMSFBJZHZGTVdCQ2xJMHlsNm1yUU5rV0lpT3o0aFhNTE9uaVFKMm53RU42SWJMc2wifQ%3D%3D

Since hospital-employed doctors tend to perform services in an outpatient setting, the trend increases costs for Medicare and patients.

Hospitals have been scooping up physician practices at a record clip. Research conducted by Avalere for the nonprofit Physician Advocacy Institute shows hospitals nabbed 5,000 physician practices and employed 14,000 physicians between July 2015 and July 2016, an 11 percent uptick.

Since 2012, that’s a 100 percent increase in hospital-owned physician practices, indicating those medical groups may be struggling to maintain independence in a healthcare landscape that is increasingly geared toward larger, integrated systems.

That scenario increases costs for both Medicare and patients themselves, since hospital-employed physicians tend to perform services in a hospital outpatient setting. The researchers revealed higher costs for services such as colonoscopy and cardiac imaging.

Increased physician employment by hospitals, in fact, caused Medicare costs for four healthcare services to rise $3.1 billion between 2012 and 2015, with beneficiaries facing $411 million more in financial responsibility for these services than they would have if they were performed in independent physicians’ offices, the research showed.

From mid-2012 to mid-2016, the percentage of hospital-employed physicians increased by more than 63 percent, with increases in nearly every six-month time period measured over these four years. All regions of the country saw an increase in hospital-owned practices at every measured time period, with a range of total increase from 83 percent to 205 percent.

This trend, the authors said, shows government- and insurer-mandated payment policies favor larger health systems, creating a competitive disadvantage for independent physicians, many of whom are already struggling financially due to administrative and regulatory burdens. Independent physicians often find it prohibitively difficult to cut costs while maintaining clinical quality, and failure to maintain quality can result in federal reimbursement penalties.

The acquisition trend held true in every region of the country, but was most prevalent in the Midwest; it was least prevalent in the South.

PAI is examining these trends as part of an ongoing effort to better understand how physician employment and health care consolidation affects the practice of medicine and impacts patients.

Are Hospitals Becoming Obsolete?

Hospitals are disappearing. While they may never completely go away, they will continue to shrink in number and importance. That is inevitable and good.

The reputation of hospitals has had its ups and downs. Benjamin Rush, a surgeon general of the Continental Army, called the hospitals of his day the “sinks of human life.” Through the 19th century, most Americans were treated in their homes. Hospitals were a last resort, places only the very poor or those with no family went. And they went mainly to die.

Then several innovations made hospitals more attractive. Anesthesia and sterile techniques made surgery less risky and traumatic, while the discovery of X-rays in 1895 enhanced the diagnostic powers of physicians. And the understanding of germ theory reduced the spread of infectious diseases.

Middle- and upper-class Americans increasingly turned to hospitals for treatment. Americans also strongly supported the expansion of hospitals through philanthropy and legislation.

Today, hospitals house M.R.I.s, surgical robots and other technological wonders, and at $1.1 trillion they account for about a third of all medical spending. That’s nearly the size of the Spanish economy.

And yet this enormous sector of the economy has actually been in decline for some time.

Consider this: What year saw the maximum number of hospitalizations in the United States? The answer is 1981.

That might surprise you. That year, there were over 39 million hospitalizations — 171 admissions per 1,000 Americans. Thirty-five years later, the population has increased by 40 percent, but hospitalizations have decreased by more than 10 percent. There is now a lower rate of hospitalizations than in 1946. As a result, the number of hospitals has declined to 5,534 this year from 6,933 in 1981.

This is because, in a throwback to the 19th century, hospitals now seem less therapeutic and more life-threatening. In 2002, researchers from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimated that there were 1.7 million cases of hospital-acquired infections that caused nearly 100,000 deaths. Other problems — from falls to medical errors — seem too frequent. It is clear that a hospital admission is not a rejuvenating stay at a spa, but a trial to be endured. And those beeping machines and middle-of-the-night interruptions are not conducive to recovery.

The number of hospitals is also declining because more complex care can safely and effectively be provided elsewhere, and that’s good news.

When I was training to become an oncologist, most chemotherapy was administered in the hospital. Now much better anti-nausea medications and more tolerable oral instead of intravenous treatments have made a hospital admission for chemotherapy unusual. Similarly, hip and knee replacements once required days in the hospital; many can now be done overnight in ambulatory surgical centers. Births outside of hospitals are also increasing, as more women have babies at home or at birthing centers.

Studies have shown that patients with heart failure, pneumonia and some serious infections can be given intravenous antibiotics and other hospital-level treatments at home by visiting nurses. These “hospital at home” programs usually lead to more rapid recoveries, at a lower cost.

As these trends accelerate, many of today’s hospitals will downsize, merge or close. Others will convert to doctors’ offices or outpatient clinics. Those that remain will be devoted to emergency rooms, high-tech services for premature babies, patients requiring brain surgery and organ transplants, and the like. Meanwhile, the nearly one billion annual visits to physicians’ offices, imaging facilities, surgical centers, urgent-care centers and “doc in the box” clinics will grow.

Special interests in the hospital business aren’t going to like this. They will lobby for higher hospital payments from the government and insurers and for other preferential treatment, often arguing that we need to retain the “good” jobs hospitals offer. But this is disingenuous; the shift of medical services out of hospitals will create other good jobs — for home nurses, community health care workers and staff at outpatient centers.

Hospitals will also continue consolidating into huge, multihospital systems. They say that this will generate cost savings that can be passed along to patients, but in fact, the opposite happens. The mergers create local monopolies that raise prices to counter the decreased revenue from fewer occupied beds. Federal antitrust regulators must be more vigorous in opposing such mergers.

Instead of trying to forestall the inevitable, we should welcome the advances that are making hospitals less important. Any change in the health care system that saves money and makes patients healthier deserves to be celebrated.

 

Ascension, Presence Health ink deal to merge

https://www.healthcaredive.com/news/ascension-presence-health-ink-deal-to-merge/517334/

Dive Brief:

  • Ascension and Presence Health signed a definitive agreement for Presence to join Ascension and become part of AMITA Health, a joint venture between Ascension’s Alexian Brothers Health System and Adventist Midwest Health. The two systems signed a non-binding letter of intent to strike a deal last August.
  • Presence Health will add medical centers, outpatient facilities and other care sites to AMITA Health except for Presence Life Connections, which will go under Ascension’s senior care subsidiary, Ascension Living.
  • Presence is one of the largest Catholic health systems in Illinois, serving about 4 million people with annual revenue of $2.6 billion. Ascension is the biggest nonprofit health system in the U.S. by acute care beds, according to Becker’s, with total operating revenue of $11.3 billion as of the second half of 2017, according to the company’s website.

Dive Insight:

Anthony Tersigni, president and CEO of Ascension, said the organizations remain committed to “providing compassionate and personalized care for all, with special attention to persons living in poverty and those most vulnerable.” Bringing the two companies together will “strengthen Catholic healthcare as we provide affordable, accessible and quality care to the community.”

The companies said the transaction advances their “joint commitment to the mission of faith-based healthcare.” They also specifically highlighted both companies’ accountable care organizations (ACOs) that will allow AMITA Health “to even more efficiently and effectively address the growing emphasis on managing the health of large populations.”

Hinsdale, Illinois-based Adventist Midwest Health, which is part of Adventist Health System, and Arlington Heights, Illinois-based Alexian Brothers Health System, part of Ascension, formed AMITA Health in February 2015. AMITA Health is an integrated health system with nine hospitals that serves western and northwestern suburban Chicago.

Ascension is in talks to buy Providence St. Joseph Health, the Wall Street Journal reported late last year, which would make the company even bigger with estimated annual revenue of $45 billion.

The agreement is the latest involving health systems trying to find ways to cut costs and reach scale, while looking to improve quality of care. These deals are becoming increasingly important as hospitals face lower reimbursements and patient volumes and payers push more care to outpatient settings.

A recent Kaufman Hall report found hospital and health system M&A increased from 102 deals and $31.3 billion in 2016 to 115 and a whopping $63.2 billion in 2017. Eleven of those sales involved sellers with net revenues of $1 billion or more, which was the most megadeals recorded.

Kaufman Hall predicts the M&A trend will continue this year, including blockbuster deals, aligning non-traditional players with targeted segments, partnerships involving nonprofits and for-profits and transactions along the continuum of care.

“2017 will likely be looked back upon as a bellwether for 2018 and beyond as the industry transforms itself with both proactive initiatives and reactionary responses to epic levels of disruption,” said Kaufman Hall.

 

Moody’s: Aggressive insurer growth strategies threaten nonprofit hospitals

https://www.healthcaredive.com/news/moodys-aggressive-insurer-growth-strategies-threaten-nonprofit-hospitals/517691/

Dive Brief:

  • Disruptive growth strategies among health insurers threaten the future margins and volumes of nonprofit hospitals, a new Moody’s Investor Services report maintains.
  • Vertical integrations — such as the proposed CVS Health-Aetna merger and UnitedHealth/Optum-DaVita deal — put insurers “in direct competition” with hospitals for outpatient volume and revenue and could allow payers to carve out hospitals or specific services from their contracts, according to the report.
  • Moody’s warns that the embrace of value-based payment models by insurers is also a threat, as it shifts patients from high-cost inpatient care to cheaper outpatient settings.

Dive Insight:

Hospitals are already feeling the squeeze from cuts in Medicare reimbursements, which are driving patients with less serious ailments to urgent care and other outpatient treatment facilities. Depressed patient admissions and payments have providers searching for cost savings. The result has been a near constant stream of divestitures, mergers and layoffs that shows no signs of abating. At the same time, hospitals have been acquiring physician practice and outpatient care sites to diversify their revenue streams as demand shifts.

Those efforts could be undermined as insurers move into the provider space by buying up professional practices, for example.

“As the insurer owns more non-acute healthcare providers — particularly physician groups — it would be better able to carve out hospitals or certain services from its contracts, which would translate into lower volume and revenue for hospitals,” the report said.

Vertically integrated private payers will cut into hospital revenues by offering similar outpatient and post-acute care to members at lower costs than hospitals can afford, Moody’s says. With enough integration, they could siphon more patients and revenue from struggling hospitals.

Optum’s physician acquisitions and similar deals will also cut into hospitals’ referral volumes. “The acquisition of relatively large physician groups is noteworthy because these providers are the key decision makers in determining what type of treatment the patient will receive and where the care is provided,” the report said.

Increasing scale fueled by more Medicare and Medicaid managed care members, coupled with market concentration, will also give insurers the edge in price negotiations, according to the report. Meanwhile, reduced government payments will make hospitals more dependent on private insurance to cover their costs.

“Insurers flexing their negotiating power by offering lower rate increases will likely result in more standoffs and terminations of contracts between insurers and hospitals,” Diana Lee, a vice president at Moody’s, said in the report. “To gain leverage, we expect hospitals to continue M&A and consolidation.”

 

Mercy Health and Bon Secours Announce Merger

http://www.healthleadersmedia.com/finance/mercy-health-and-bon-secours-announce-merger?utm_source=edit&utm_medium=ENL&utm_campaign=HLM-Daily-SilverPop_02222018&spMailingID=12986669&spUserID=MTY3ODg4NTg1MzQ4S0&spJobID=1342027713&spReportId=MTM0MjAyNzcxMwS2#

Image result for hospital merger

 

The Maryland and Ohio health systems announced Wednesday their intention to merge. The joint venture would be the nation’s fifth-largest Catholic health system.

Bon Secours Health System and Mercy Health announced their intention Wednesday to merge, potentially forming the fifth-largest Catholic health system in the country.

The proposed merger would join Mercy, the largest health system in Ohio, with Bon Secours, a Maryland-based Catholic health system with locations throughout the East Coast.

Related: Expect M&A Deluge To Continue Through 2018 And Beyond

If approved, the new system would operate 43 hospitals and more than 1,000 care sites across seven states, while generating close to $9 billion in annual operating revenues. Additionally, the new system would employ more than 2,100 physicians and advanced practice clinicians.

“Our decision to join forces with Bon Secours is rooted in our shared and very deep commitment to delivering compassionate, low-cost, high-quality health care to our communities,” said John M. Starcher Jr., president and CEO of Mercy Health, in a statement. “Working together, our strong faith-based heritage fuels our mutual focus to provide efficient and effective health care for each patient who comes through our doors.”

The proposed merger will need to gain approval from state and federal regulators as well as the Catholic Church, which oversees both systems. Leaders from Mercy and Bon Secours expect the deal to be completed by the end of the year.

“The mission, vision, values and geographic service areas of Bon Secours and Mercy Health are remarkably well-aligned and highly complementary,” said Richard J. Statuto, president and CEO of Bon Secours, in a statement. “This merger strengthens our shared commitment to improve population health, eliminate health disparities, build strength to address social determinants of health, and invest heavily in innovating our approaches to health care.”

Expert Advice For The Corporate Titans Taking On Health Care

Expert Advice For The Corporate Titans Taking On Health Care

An announcement Tuesday by three of the nation’s corporate titans — Amazon, Berkshire Hathaway and JPMorgan Chase & Co. — that they are joining forces to address the high costs of employee health care has stirred the health policy pot. It immediately sent shock waves through the health sector of the stock market and reinvigorated talk about health care technology, value and quality.

Though details regarding the undertaking are thin, the companies said in a release that their partnership’s intent is to improve employee satisfaction and hold down costs by bringing “their scale and complementary expertise to this long-term effort.”

They plan to create an independent company, “free from profit-making incentives and constraints,” to focus on “technology solutions.”

Berkshire Hathaway CEO Warren Buffett described health care costs as “a hungry tapeworm on the American economy,” and Amazon founder and CEO Jeff Bezos said the partnership was “open-eyed about the degree of difficulty” ahead. Jamie Dimon, chairman and CEO of JPMorgan, said the results could benefit the employees of these companies and possibly all Americans

But what does all of this mean and how can it be successful when so many other initiatives have fallen short? KHN asked a variety of health policy experts their thoughts on this venture, and what advice they would offer these CEOs as they go forward. Some of the advice has been edited for clarity and length.


Tom Miller, resident fellow, American Enterprise Institute (Courtesy of Tom Miller)

Tom Miller, resident fellow, American Enterprise Institute:

“It’s great that someone theoretically with resources would try to build a better mousetrap. But it’s been difficult to do, and part of it is regulatory and competitive barriers are well-constructed in the health care sphere, which tend to make it less receptive or subject to competitive pressures.

“I welcome any new capital trying to disrupt health care. … The incumbents are comfortable and could use disruption. If Amazon has an idea, and is willing to put some money behind it, that’s wonderful. What they are willing to do other than fly low-cost providers for home visits in drones — I don’t know. They’d probably have to miniaturize them, wouldn’t they?”


Stan Dorn, senior fellow, Families USA (Courtesy of Stan Dorn)

Stan Dorn, senior fellow, Families USA:

“Number one, look at prices. America doesn’t use more health care than European countries, but we pay a lot more and that’s because of prices more than anything else. Look at hospital prices and prescription drug prices. I would also say, look to eliminate middlemen operating in darkness. I’m thinking in particular of pharmacy benefit managers. Often, the supply chain is hidden and complex and every step along the way the middlemen are taking their share, and it winds up costing a huge amount of money.”


Bob Kocher, partner, Venrock (Courtesy of Bob Kocher)

Bob Kocher, partner, Venrock:

“It has been said that health care is complicated. One thing that is not complicated is that the way to save money is to focus on the sickest patients. And that’s the only thing that has proven to work in great primary care. I hope Amazon realizes this early and does not think that [its smart digital assistant] Alexa and apps are going to make us healthier and save any money.

“It would sure be nice if they invest in a ‘post-CPT-ICD-10-and-many-bills-per-visit’ world where we know prices, can easily know what is known about quality and experience, and have same-day service.”


Tracy Watts, senior partner, Mercer (Courtesy of Tracy Watts)

Tracy Watts, senior partner, Mercer:

“Everyone thinks millennials want to do everything on their phones. But that’s not necessarily the case.

“[There was a recent] survey about this — specifically, millennials are the most interested in new health care offerings, but it wasn’t as much high-tech as it is convenience they are interested in — same-day appointments with a family doctor, guaranteed appointments with specialists, home visits, a wider array of services available at retail clinics. That was kind of an ‘aha’ — this kind of convenience and high-touch experience is what they’re looking for. And when you think of ‘health care of the future,’ that’s not what comes to mind.”


John Rother, president and CEO, National Coalition on Health Care (Courtesy of John Rother)

John Rother, president and CEO, National Coalition on Health Care:

“Health care is complex and expensive, so the aim should always be simplicity and affordability. Three keys to success: manage chronic conditions recognizing the life context of the patient, emphasize primary care-based medical homes and aggressively negotiate prescription drug costs.”


Suzanne Delbanco, executive director, Catalyst for Payment Reform (Courtesy of Suzanne Delbanco)

Suzanne Delbanco, executive director, Catalyst for Payment Reform:

“The biggest driver of health care costs is prices. Those are being driven up by health care providers who have consolidated and will continue to consolidate and amass more market power.

“It sounds like they [the companies] are limiting the use of health plans, but if they’re going to get into that business, they’re going to come up with the same challenges health plans face. What would be really innovative would be to build some provider systems from the ground up where they can truly get a handle on the actual costs and eliminate the market power that drives the prices up, and they can have control over their prices.”


Brian Marcotte, president and CEO, National Business Group on Health (Courtesy of Brian Marcotte)

Brian Marcotte, president and CEO, National Business Group on Health:

“They recognize this is [a] long-term play to get involved in this. I’d have to say, this industry is ripe for disruption.

“I think we know technology will continue to play an increasing role in how consumers access and receive health care. We’ve also learned most consumers do not touch the health care delivery system with enough frequency to ever be a sophisticated consumer. What’s intriguing about this partnership is Amazon for many consumers has become part of their day-to-day world, part of their routine. It’s intriguing to consider the possibilities of integrating health care into consumer routine.

“And I think that therein lies the opportunity. Employers offer a lot of resources to their employees to help them maximize their experience, and their No. 1 challenge is engagement.”


Joseph Antos, health economist, American Enterprise Institute (Courtesy of Joseph Antos)

Joseph Antos, health economist, American Enterprise Institute:

“My first suggestion is to look at what other employers have done (some unsuccessfully) and consider how to adapt those ideas for the three companies and more broadly. Change incentives for providers. Change incentives for consumers. Work on ways to reduce the effects of market consolidation. The bottom line: Don’t keep doing what we are doing now. I don’t see that these three companies have enough presence in health markets to pull this off anytime soon, but perhaps this should be viewed as the private-sector version of the Affordable Care Act’s Innovation Center— except, this time, there may be some new ideas to test.”


Ceci Connolly, president and CEO, Alliance of Community Health Plans (Courtesy of Ceci Connolly)

Ceci Connolly, president and CEO, Alliance of Community Health Plans:

“We know that 5 percent of any population consumes 50 percent of the health care dollar. I would encourage this group to focus on how to better serve those individuals who need help managing multiple chronic conditions.”


David Lansky, CEO, Pacific Business Group on Health (Courtesy of David Lansky)

David Lansky, CEO, Pacific Business Group on Health:

“The incumbent providers of services to our members are not doing as much as we need done for affordability and quality. So, we are pleased to see them go down this path. We don’t know what piece of the puzzle they will tackle.

“We know well-intended efforts over the years haven’t added up to material impact on cost and quality. I would suspect they are looking at doing something broader, more disruptive than initiatives we have tried before.

“I think across the board they have the opportunity to set high standards for the health system in whatever platform they use. These companies have a history of raising the bar. Potentially, it could be a help to all of us.”

Paying more and getting less: As hospital chains grow, local services shrink

Paying more and getting less: As hospital chains grow, local services shrink

When most hospitals close, it’s plain to see. Equipment and fixtures are hauled out and carted away. Doctors and nurses leave and buildings are shuttered, maybe demolished.

But another fate befalling U.S. hospitals is almost invisible. Across the country, conglomerates that control an increasing share of the market are changing their business models, consolidating services in one regional “hub” hospital and cutting them from others.

In recent years, hospitals across the country have seen their entire inpatient departments closed — no patients staying the night, no nursery, no place for the sickest of the sick to recover. These facilities become, in essence, outpatient clinics.

Hospital executives see these cuts as sound business decisions, and say they are the inevitable consequence of changes in how people are using medical services. But to patients and local leaders who joined forces with these larger health networks just years ago, they feel more like broken promises: Not only are they losing convenient access to care, their local hospitals are also getting drained of revenue and jobs that sustain their communities.

“It’s not even just betrayal. It’s disgust, frankly,” said Mariah Lynne, a resident of Albert Lea, Minn., where Mayo Clinic is removing most inpatient care and the birthing unit from one of its hospitals. “Never would I have expected a brand of this caliber to be so callous.”

In 2015, the most recent year of data, these service reductions accounted for nearly half of the hospital closures recorded around the country, according to the Medicare Payment Advisory Commission. (By MedPac’s definition, the loss of inpatient wards is equivalent to closure.) These data do not capture more discreet closures of surgical and maternity units that are also happening at local hospitals.

And the trend doesn’t just affect nearby residents. It represents a slow-moving but seismic shift in the idea of the community hospital — the place down the street where you could go at any hour, and for any need. Does the need for that hospital still exist, or is it a nostalgic holdover? And if it is still needed, is it economically viable?

The eye of the storm

The effort to scale back inpatient care is occurring within some of the nation’s most prestigious nonprofit hospitals.

Mayo Clinic announced last summer that it would cease almost all inpatient care at its hospital in Albert Lea. The health network said it would keep the emergency department open, but send most other patients to Austin, 23 miles east.

In Massachusetts, sprawling Partners HealthCare said it will shut the only hospitalin Lynn, a city of 92,000 people near Boston, and instead direct patients to its hospital in neighboring Salem. Only urgent care and outpatient services will remain in Lynn.

And in Ohio, Cleveland Clinic has made similar moves. In 2016, it closed its hospital in Lakewood, a densely packed Cleveland suburb. It is replacing the hospital with a family health center and emergency department.

The cuts follow a period of rapid consolidation in the health care industry. Of the 1,412 hospital mergers in the U.S. between 1998 and 2015, nearly 40 percent occurred after 2009, according to data published recently in the journal Health Affairs.

As large providers have expanded their networks, they have also gained inpatient beds that are no longer in demand — thanks to improved surgical techniques and other improvements that are shortening hospital stays. Hence the closures.

But the hollowing-out of historic community hospitals has surfaced fundamental tensions between providers and the cities and towns they serve. Residents are voicing frustration with large health networks that build expensive downtown campuses, charge the highest prices, and then cut services in outlying communities they deem unprofitable.

Health scholars also note a growing dissonance between the nonprofit status of these hospitals and their increasing market power. While the nonprofits continue to claim tens of millions of dollars a year in tax breaks to serve the sick and vulnerable, some are functioning more like monopolies with the clout to shift prices and services however they wish.

“These providers say they are worth the high price and that in the American system, if you have a reputation for excellence, you deserve higher fees,” said Dr. Robert Berenson, a senior fellow at the Urban Institute. “My response to that would be, if we had a well-functioning market, that might make some sense. But we don’t.”

Changing demand among patients

The financial upheaval in community hospitals is driven by sweeping changes in the delivery of care. Procedures and conditions that once required lengthy hospitalizations now require only outpatient visits.

At Mayo Clinic, Dr. Annie Sadosty knows this evolution well because it roughly traces her career. She uses appendectomies as an example. Twenty-five years ago, when she was in medical school, the procedure was performed through a 5-inch incision and resulted in a weeklong hospitalization.

Today, the same procedure is done laparoscopically, through a much smaller incision, resulting in a recovery time of about 24 hours. “Some people don’t even stay in the hospital,” Sadosty said.

Something similar could be said for a wide range of medical procedures and services — from knee replacements to the removal of prostate glands in cancer patients. Hospital stays are either being eliminated or reduced to one or two days. And patients who were once routinely admitted for conditions like pneumonia are now sent home and managed remotely.

“Hospitals that used to be full of patients with common problems are no longer as full,” said Sadosty, an emergency medicine physician at Mayo and regional vice president of operations. “It’s been a breakneck pace of innovation and change that has led to a necessary evolution in the way that we care for people.”

That evolution has cratered demand for inpatient beds. In 2017, the Medicare Payment Advisory Commission noted that hospital occupancy is hovering around 62 percent, though the number of empty beds varies from region to region.

In Albert Lea, Mayo administrators said the changes at the hospital will only impact about seven inpatients a day. Currently, caring for those patients requires nursing staff, hospitalists, and other caregivers, not to mention overhead associated with operating a hospital around the clock. The financial result is predictable: Hospital executives reported that jointly Albert Lea and Austin hospitals have racked up $13 million in losses over the last two years.

With inpatient demand declining, hospital administrators decided to consolidate operations in Austin. The decision meant the removal of Albert Lea’s intensive care unit, inpatient surgeries, and the labor and delivery unit. Behavioral health services will be consolidated in Albert Lea.

Cleveland Clinic described similar pressures. Dr. J. Stephen Jones, president of the clinic’s regional hospital and family health centers, said use of inpatient beds has declined rapidly in Lakewood, dropping between 5 and 8 percent a year over the last decade. By 2015, 94 percent of visits were for outpatient services — a change that was undermining financial performance. The hospital lost about $46.5 million on operations that year, according to the clinic’s financial statements, and its aging infrastructure was in need of repair.

“Hospitals are very expensive places to run,” Jones said. “Lakewood was losing money on an operating basis for at least five years” before this decision was made.

Closures spark fierce protests

But the service cuts in Albert Lea, Lynn, and Lakewood — backed by nearly identical narratives from hospital executives — provoked the same reaction from the communities surrounding them.

Outrage.

Residents accused the hospital chains of putting their bottom lines above the needs of patients. Even if these individual hospitals were losing money, they said, nonprofits have an overriding mission to serve their communities.

“Why is profit such a priority, and more of a priority than the Hippocratic oath?” said Kevin Young, a spokesman for Save Lakewood Hospital, a group formed to oppose Cleveland Clinic’s removal of inpatient services. “Why are we allowing this to happen?”

The fight over Lakewood Hospital has persisted for more than three years, spawning lawsuits, an unsuccessful ballot referendum to keep the hospital open, and even a complaint filed by a former congressman to the Federal Trade Commission. None has caused Cleveland Clinic to reverse course.

Meanwhile, in Albert Lea, opponents to the service cuts have taken matters into their own hands: With Mayo refusing to back down, they are hunting to bring in a competitor.

A market analysis commissioned by Albert Lea’s Save Our Hospital group concluded that a full-service hospital could thrive in the community. The report included several caveats: A new provider would need to attract new physicians and capture market share from Mayo, a tall order in a region where Mayo is the dominant provider.

But members of the group said the findings directly contradict Mayo’s explanations to the community. They argue that, far from financially strained, the health system is simply trying to increase margins by shifting more money and services away from poorer rural communities.

“They don’t care what happens in Albert Lea,” said Jerry Collins, a member of the group. “Mayo cares what happens with its destination medical center.” He was referring to Mayo’s $6 billion project — funded with $585 million in taxpayer dollars — to expand its downtown Rochester campus and redevelop much of the property around it.

Sensitivity to Mayo’s service reductions is heightened by its control of the market in Southeastern Minnesota. It is by far the largest provider in the region and charges higher prices than facilities in other parts of the state. A colonoscopy at Mayo’s hospital in Albert Lea costs $1,595, compared to $409 at Hennepin County Medical Center in Minneapolis, according to Minnesota HealthScores, a nonprofit that tracks prices. The gap is even bigger for a back MRI: $3,000 in Albert Lea versus $589 at Allina Health Clinics in Minneapolis.

“All of Southeast Minnesota is feeling the domination of one large corporation,” said Al Arends, who chairs fundraising for Save Our Hospital. “They are ignoring the economic impact on the community and on the health care for patients.”

The community’s loud resistance has drawn the attention of the state’s attorney general and governor, as well as U.S. Rep. Tim Walz, who has begun a series of “facilitated dialogues” between Mayo and its opponents in Albert Lea.

So far, the dialogue has failed to forge a compromise. Mayo is proceeding with its plans. It has relocated the hospital’s intensive care unit to Austin, and inpatient surgeries and labor and delivery services are planned to follow.

Mayo executives reject the notion that they are abandoning Albert Lea or compromising services. The hospital plans to renovate the Albert Lea cancer wing and beef up outpatient care, improvements executives say have gotten lost amid the criticism.

As for inpatient care, they say, Mayo must consider quality and safety issues. With the hospital in Albert Lea only admitting a handful of patients a day, caregivers’ skills are likely to diminish, potentially undermining quality. They also cited recruiting challenges.

“It’s difficult to outfit both [Albert Lea and Austin] hospitals with all the incumbent equipment, expertise, multidisciplinary teams, and nursing staff,” vice president Sadosty said. “This is one way we can preserve and elevate care, and do it in an affordable way so our patients have access to high-quality care as close to their homes as possible.”

A strained system

Efforts to regionalize medical services also pose a new challenge: Can hospitals transport patients fast enough — and coordinate their care well enough — to ensure that no one falls through the cracks?

It is a question that will face stroke victims and expectant mothers who now must drive greater distances, sometimes in treacherous conditions, to make it to the hospital on time.

In Massachusetts, Partners HealthCare will face that test as it moves inpatient and emergency care from Union Hospital in Lynn to North Shore Medical Center in Salem. The hospitals are less than 6 miles apart. However, the short distance belies the difficulty of coordinating service across it.

Ambulances will have fewer options in emergencies. And if residents drive themselves to the wrong place in a panic, precious time gets wasted.

Dr. David Roberts, president of North Shore Medical Center, said the health system is working to educate patients to ensure that they go to the correct facility. He added that Partners already conducts risk assessments of patients with severe medical problems, and transfers them to hospitals with higher-level care when necessary.

In cases of suspected stroke, Roberts said, Partners employs a telemedicine program in which patients who arrive in its emergency rooms are examined by physicians at Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston. “They instantly, based on imaging, can decide which patient might benefit from having a clot pulled out of an artery in their head,” Roberts said. “They can say, ‘Yeah, this patient needs to be in our radiology suite in the next 30 minutes, and they make that happen.”

Still, opponents of the closure say it raises a broader concern about whether Partners’s actions are driven by a financial strategy to shift care away from low-income communities with higher concentrations of uninsured patients and those on Medicaid, which pays less for hospital services than commercial insurers. Union Hospital serves a largely low-income population.

“Why don’t we see these cuts across the Partners system? Why are we only seeing it in Lynn?” said Dianne Hills, a member of the Lynn Health Task Force. “Are we moving into a world where you have two systems of care — one for the poor and the old, and another for the affluent?”

Roberts said the consolidation at North Shore Medical Center in Salem has nothing to do with the income level of population in Lynn. He said the hospitals serve “identical” mixes of patients with government and commercial insurances.

“Our payer mix at both hospitals is adverse,” he said. “And despite that, Partners invested $208 million” to support the expansion of North Shore Medical Center.

Roberts acknowledged that the closure of the hospital in Lynn will have a negative impact on the city’s economy. But he said construction of a $24 million outpatient complex will mitigate some of that damage. The facility is expected to open in 2019. “It doesn’t take away the sting of losing a hospital,” Roberts said. “I’m hoping the [new] building goes a long way. We’re going to grow it as a vibrant medical village.”

Meanwhile, Mayo is proceeding with its changes in Albert Lea. Executives have assured Albert Lea residents that they will receive the same level of care for emergency services and upgraded facilities for outpatient care.

But some community members said they are already noticing problems with Mayo’s regionalization. One local pharmacist, Curt Clarambeau, said he can’t get timely responses to reports of adverse drug reactions. A call to the hospital in Albert Lea results in several phone transfers and no immediate response.

“It’s just impossible. It takes days,” Clarambeau said. “They’re trying to create efficiencies by not having everyone calling the doctors, but there are certain things we need to talk to them about.”

Don Sorensen, 79, said he’s also had trouble getting access to doctors at the hospital in Albert Lea. He said began to suffer from severe knee pain in November, but couldn’t get an appointment. His wife was put on hold for 40 minutes before learning the earliest appointment was still several days away.

At the suggestion of his RV repairman, Sorensen called a clinic in Minneapolis and got an appointment the same day. His wife, Eleanor, drove him, and he ended up with a brace, a prescription, and another follow up appointment.

But the couple is worried about continuing to make the drive if the logjam persists in Albert Lea. “We used to feel secure because we had Mayo here,” Eleanor Sorensen said. “We could get the care we needed. But now everybody our age feels very very vulnerable.”

 

 

Catholic Health Initiatives CFO Dean Swindle’s advice to other systems: ‘Don’t get too comfortable with your past success’

https://www.beckershospitalreview.com/finance/catholic-health-initiatives-cfo-dean-swindle-s-advice-to-other-systems-don-t-get-too-comfortable-with-your-past-success.html

Image result for catholic health initiatives

Englewood, Colo.-based Catholic Health Initiatives embarked on a turnaround plan several years ago with the goal of improving its financial picture while providing high-quality care at its hospitals and other facilities across the nation. The system has made great strides toward its goal, yet there is still a lot of work to be done.

CHI has been laser-focused on performance improvement over the past three years, but rolling out a comprehensive turnaround plan across an organization with 100 hospitals is challenging, and progress is slow. The health system’s efforts just began to take hold in the second half of fiscal year 2017. Although CHI has encountered obstacles on its path to financial stability, the system is pleased with the headway it has made and expects more improvement in the coming months.

CHI’s cost-cutting initiative

To improve its finances, CHI set out to cut costs across the system. It put a great deal of energy into lowering labor and supply costs, which combined can make up two-thirds or more of the system’s operating expenses. CHI developed plans and playbooks focused on reducing these costs several years ago, knowing it would not immediately see results.

In the labor area, CHI President of Enterprise Business Lines and CFO Dean Swindle says the system had to incur costs to cut costs. “In the second half of the year [fiscal 2017] we began to see the benefits of our labor activities in the markets, but we also had cost,” he says. For example, CHI incurred the one-time expense of hiring advisers to help the system develop new labor management techniques. The system also cut jobs, which resulted in severance costs.

“When we got to the second half of 2017, we were very confident and felt very pleased that we were seeing benefit … but it was difficult for others to see it because it was for half of the year, and we had the one-time costs that were burdening that,” Mr. Swindle says.

After factoring in expenses and one-time charges, CHI ended fiscal year 2017 with an operating loss of $585.2 million, compared to an operating loss of $371.4 million in fiscal year 2016.

However, CHI saw its financial situation improve in the first quarter of fiscal year 2018. The system’s operating loss narrowed to $77.9 million from $180.7 million in the same period of the year prior. “What you were able to see in the first quarter [of fiscal 2018] … was the one-time costs had gone away for the most part; those weren’t burdening our results,” says Mr. Swindle.

He says although the system employed more physicians, its absolute labor costs were lower year over year. CHI’s supply costs, including drug costs, were also lower in the first quarter of fiscal year 2018 than in the first quarter of last year.

Mr. Swindle says CHI saw its finances improve in a difficult operating environment. Patient volume was lower in the first quarter of fiscal year 2018 than a year prior, and the system also experienced a nearly $26 million loss from business operations as a result of Hurricane Harvey.

“[This has] given us a level of confidence that we can move forward and address the difficulty that our industry is going to be facing over the next several years,” he says.

In early January, Fitch Ratings affirmed CHI’s “BBB+” rating and upgraded its credit outlook to stable from negative. The credit rating agency cited the health system’s strong start to the 2018 fiscal year and financial improvements in several markets as key reasons for the upgrade.

Preparing for new challenges

Although healthcare organizations are currently facing many challenges, including regulatory uncertainty and dwindling reimbursement rates, Mr. Swindle anticipates hospitals and health systems will face new obstacles over the next few years.

For example, hospitals will be challenged by changes to the 340B Drug Pricing Program. CMS’ 2018 Medicare Outpatient Prospective Payment System rule finalized a proposal to pay hospitals 22.5 percent less than the average sales price for drugs purchased through the 340B program. Medicare previously paid the average sales price plus 6 percent.

“I don’t think 340B was by chance and in isolation,” says Mr. Swindle. “I think we’re entering one of those cycles that the whole economic environment of our industry is going to be working against us.”

The pressures in the industry are driving hospitals and health systems to join forces. After more than a year of talks, CHI and San Francisco-based Dignity Health signed a definitive merger agreement in December 2017. The proposed transaction will create a massive nonprofit Catholic health system, comprising 139 hospitals across 28 states.

In the short term, the combination of the two systems is expected to drive synergies in the $500 million range, according to Mr. Swindle. In the coming months, the two systems will dive deeper into the synergies they expect to achieve over a multiyear period. “We do believe beyond the synergies there are some strategic initiatives we can put into place as a combined organization that we couldn’t do individually,” Mr. Swindle says. “You won’t see the benefit of those as much in the short term.”

“Take a deep breath”

Mr. Swindle knows firsthand that developing and executing an operational turnaround plan is no easy task. However, today’s healthcare landscape requires health systems to re-engineer their business models.

“Regardless of how good your results … have been over the last five to 10 years, we’re all going to have to transform ourselves in our own way to meet the characteristics of our organizations,” says Mr. Swindle.

When embarking on a performance improvement plan, the first thing health system CFOs should do is “take a deep breath,” he says. Then, they should focus on the things they have more control over. Mr. Swindle says it is critical for health systems to continue to drive improvement in patient experience and quality. They also need to be strategic cost managers.

“It’s not going to be as easy as just saying we’re going to take these [full-time employees] out or reduce this service. You’re really going to have to be very smart and very thoughtful about how you become a good cost manager that adds value to your communities,” says Mr. Swindle. “Don’t get too comfortable with your past success and your past models.”

 

13 healthcare M&A deals that made headlines in 2017

https://www.fiercehealthcare.com/finance/healthcare-mergers-and-acquisitions-hospitals-payers-year-review?mkt_tok=eyJpIjoiTnpreE9HSTFPVFJqWldZMSIsInQiOiJNM0NTa1ZBZW1kU001bkx4SEcwNmtSeEFVNG9oZnpUbEF2UVpMY1lDUWNZYm8zZTFuejJNUGpPOTJuYVlXTlZwWHdXU1hrRm50Z1NFbHJGRjdUMld6U1JoYWo0enNaUlEzNldab2tcL3hxV3NPaTBlK2xKbmVSQmgwMTE2NFZpYzgifQ%3D%3D&mrkid=959610

handshake

Analysts rightly predicted that 2016 would be a big year for healthcare industry mergers, but 2017 is on pace to top it, with a number of blockbuster mergers between big-name health systems headlining the year in M&A.

Kaufman Hall reported that 87 hospital mergers had been recorded through the third quarter of 2017, compared to 102 overall in 2016. By that point, eight transactions had included hospitals with $1 billion or more in revenue, twice as many big-ticket mergers as in all 2016.

“These transactions are driven primarily by strategic imperative and less so by financial drivers,” said Anu Singh, managing director of Kaufman Hall.

M&A activity wasn’t restricted to hospitals and health systems, as a number of deals in the payer sphere could also significantly impact the industry.

However, though the industry’s merger mania continued throughout 2017, a number of major deals were abandoned or put on hold, as the Federal Trade Commission continued to keep a close eye on merger activity.

Here’s a recap of some of the biggest healthcare industry mergers that were announced last year:

Aetna and Humana

These two payer giants announced merger plans in 2015 but abandoned the deal in February after a judge blocked it on antitrust grounds.

The Department of Justice and several states sued to block the merger in the summer of 2016, and a judge ruled that merger would unlawfully weaken competition in the Medicare Advantage market.

Anthem and Cigna

If Aetna and Humana parted ways on what one might consider good terms, the same was not true for Anthem and Cigna. This insurance megamerger was also blocked by a federal judge on antitrust grounds, but what followed was a protracted legal dispute between Anthem and Cigna over ending the deal. Anthem finally agreed to end the deal in May after a judge ruled Cigna was free to walk away.

NorthShore University HealthSystem and Advocate Health Care

A potential deal between NorthShore and Advocate was first announced in 2014, but a federal judge blocked it in early March. The two Illinois systems then agreed to abandon the merger in response.

PinnacleHealth and UPMC

PinnacleHealth revealed in March that it would merge with UPMC, the largest integrated health system in Pennsylvania, and would acquire four new hospitals in an effort to expand its reach in the central part of the state. Pinnacle previously pursued a merger with Penn State Hershey.

Partners HealthCare and Care New England Health System

Care New England had been aligned with Partners since 2009, but Partners announced in April that it would acquire the system, which is the second largest in Rhode Island.

Steward Health Care System and IASIS Healthcare LLC

Steward’s purchase of IASIS, which was finalized in October after being announced in May, established the system as the largest private hospital operator in the U.S. With the purchase, Steward now operates 36 hospitals across 10 states and is projected to have revenue in excess of $8 billion in 2018.

Ascension and Presence Health

Ascension, the largest Catholic health system in the U.S., announced plans to purchase Illinois’ largest Catholic system, Presence Health.

If the deal is finalized, Presence will operate under Ascension’s AMITA Health venture.

UNC Health Care and Carolinas HealthCare System

A final deal between UNC and Carolinas would create one of the largest nonprofit health systems in the U.S. The two providers said the alignment would increase rural access to healthcare, allow each to negotiate better with payers and potentially save millions of dollars in healthcare costs.

Centene and Fidelis Care

Centene spent much of 2017 expanding its reach in the Affordable Care Act’s marketplaces, but it announced in September that it would acquire New York-based Fidelis Care for $3.75 billion. Centene said purchasing the 1.6 million-member insurer would benefit shareholders and allow it to continue to reach underserved areas.

CVS and Aetna

Though Aetna’s merger with Humana failed earlier in 2017, it was snapped up later in the year by pharmacy giant CVS in a deal worth $69 billion.

The purchase had been rumored since October and could impact hospitals or health systems that operate urgent clinics, as gaining Aetna’s 22 million members would be a significant boon to CVS’ MinuteClinics.

Dignity Health and Catholic Health Initiatives

These two massive Catholic systems signed a deal to create a new nonprofit system, the name of which has yet to be announced. The merger would unite 139 hospitals and 700 care sites across 28 states under the same umbrella. Dignity and CHI had a combined $28.4 billion in revenue in 2017.

Providence St. Joseph Health and Ascension

A deal between these two systems has not officially been announced, but sources told The Wall Street Journal that Providence and Ascension were deep in merger talks. If these two systems were to align, it would create the largest hospital operator in the U.S., with 191 hospitals across 27 states and a combined annual revenue of $44.8 billion.

Humana and Kindred Healthcare

Following its failed merger with Aetna, Humana seemed a ripe target for acquisition by another insurer. Instead, it was revealed in mid-December that it, alongside two private equity firms, would purchase Kindred in a deal worth $4.1 billion. The Kindred deal won’t kill talk that Humana could be acquired, however.