A new paper throws cold water on an untested theory about the impact hospital realignment has on competition when the combining hospitals are far apart. The paper points out at least half a dozen possible flaws in the new theory ranging from fuzzy geographic markets to the lack of credit the authors give to increases in consumer value from realignment. The paper notes, “It is common for [hospital] systems to invest significantly to improve quality at newly acquired hospitals.”

Among the flaws identified in the paper:

  • Geographic markets that are too narrowly defined.
  • Increased value of hospitals in the same system being driven by beneficial efficiencies, increased capital investments and quality improvements at newly acquired hospitals.
  • Lack of recognition that health plans, many with significant market power, can replace hospitals that are not providing value.
  • Conclusions based on such highly aggregated data that price differences are obscured.

Despite the policymakers’ enthusiasm for new theories, this one has a long, long way to go before it ever holds any water.

Related News Articles

Headline
The National Institutes of Health yesterday awarded grants to five new projects through its Health Care Systems Research Collaboratory, which conducts clinical…
Insights and Analysis
Plus: Specialists on call at the Mayo Clinic and health insurers are building patient profiles based on socioeconomic data.
Insights and Analysis
Older adults have complex and unique health needs, which can make their medical care more challenging.
Blog
Headline
The House last night voted 230 to 185 to approve the Standard Merger and Acquisition Reviews Through Equal Rules Act (H.R. 5645), AHA-supported legislation…
Insights and Analysis
The challenge of aligning with government payment models often hampers progress, but alternate care systems have potential to ally incentives and coordinate…