Hospitals are pushing back on an experiment that would put providers on budgets. CMS should ignore their lobbyists and consultants playing games with numbers.
From my first reading, this reads like a version of Single Payer. There are cost differences between rural and urban hospitals. I assume there may be some way to compensate for the former.
Yes it would. But you would want to do it for all payers and use their populations as the denominator. That would allow one to see how the policy shifts affected different payers and populations. Good idea!
Glad it is helpful...perhaps one could total up all expenditures in a state - if that's possible - and just use CMS' pro there researchers' numbers for total spend. Rough but perhaps useful?
So True! Gooz! Singapore spends 25% of what the US does per head and delivers better outcomes because their payment system is less open to corruption!
Merrill:
From my first reading, this reads like a version of Single Payer. There are cost differences between rural and urban hospitals. I assume there may be some way to compensate for the former.
I have to read it again. Good writeup Merrill.
Much appreciate the deep research and insight.
Question...
Would it be useful to evaluate state health care costs using the insured population count as the denominator?
It seems this would eliminate the non-expansion factor.
Yes it would. But you would want to do it for all payers and use their populations as the denominator. That would allow one to see how the policy shifts affected different payers and populations. Good idea!
Glad it is helpful...perhaps one could total up all expenditures in a state - if that's possible - and just use CMS' pro there researchers' numbers for total spend. Rough but perhaps useful?