<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Could Cost Transparency Increase Costs?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.hcfama.org/2008/06/16/could-cost-transparency-increase-cost/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.hcfama.org/2008/06/16/could-cost-transparency-increase-cost/</link>
	<description>The Ultimate Massachusetts Health Care Insider Information</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 09 Feb 2012 17:46:14 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: A Healthy Blog &#187; It&#8217;s the System: Globe Looks at Hospital Costs</title>
		<link>http://blog.hcfama.org/2008/06/16/could-cost-transparency-increase-cost/#comment-1801</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[A Healthy Blog &#187; It&#8217;s the System: Globe Looks at Hospital Costs]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 17 Nov 2008 02:05:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.hcfama.org/?p=1698#comment-1801</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] higher quality care. We’re less confident that transparency is the answer (see this and this for our concerns). In any case, the continued delays in the posting of comparative price and [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] higher quality care. We’re less confident that transparency is the answer (see this and this for our concerns). In any case, the continued delays in the posting of comparative price and [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: e-Patient Dave</title>
		<link>http://blog.hcfama.org/2008/06/16/could-cost-transparency-increase-cost/#comment-1800</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[e-Patient Dave]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 26 Jun 2008 10:28:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.hcfama.org/?p=1698#comment-1800</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[@Val,

I agree about the impact of out-of-pocket, for most people, and it&#039;s not limited to the consumers themselves - it affects provider attitudes. A couple of anecdotes.

1. Many years ago a physical therapist was billing me for sessions where I was being ignored for long times, left in a room with a hot pack that had long gone cold.   I said I didn&#039;t want to be charged for a whole session. The desk looked at me like I was crazy and said &quot;But your insurance is paying for it - it doesn&#039;t affect you, does it?&quot;  Arg!

(btw, I was self pay, but that&#039;s not my point.)

2. Ten years ago, still self pay, I had a bladder infection. The local retail health stop sent out for a test, $90 out of my pocket. It came back negative and the doc said they must have screwed up so he was going to disregard it(!).  So I asked if I was going to get my money back - and he looked at me like I was crazy. Arg!

It&#039;s pretty clear to me that there&#039;s lots of senseless, avoidable waste and a LOT of people in the system figure the waste doesn&#039;t affect consumers so they don&#039;t need to do anything about it, nor do they hold each other to ordinary standards of commercial competence. (&quot;Hey, this didn&#039;t work - I&#039;m not payin&#039; for it.&quot;)

And the mechanism that causes this disconnect is the big, thick insulating  factor called insurance, which somehow makes people shrug and think that the waste doesn&#039;t increase costs or affect care.

We can change this.  All it takes (a big all) is for the people having those &quot;doesn&#039;t matter&quot; conversations to stop accepting that from each other.  I have a sense that this is happening at Beth Israel Deaconess, and I certainly hope it&#039;s happening at more and more places.

(This is finally starting to change in, for instance, the issue of paying for consequences of medical errors.)

I keep saying that when my family&#039;s next need arises I want the system to work well.  Every single person who works *in* the system should know they have a personal role in moving things in that direction - and they can make a difference.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Val,</p>
<p>I agree about the impact of out-of-pocket, for most people, and it&#8217;s not limited to the consumers themselves &#8211; it affects provider attitudes. A couple of anecdotes.</p>
<p>1. Many years ago a physical therapist was billing me for sessions where I was being ignored for long times, left in a room with a hot pack that had long gone cold.   I said I didn&#8217;t want to be charged for a whole session. The desk looked at me like I was crazy and said &#8220;But your insurance is paying for it &#8211; it doesn&#8217;t affect you, does it?&#8221;  Arg!</p>
<p>(btw, I was self pay, but that&#8217;s not my point.)</p>
<p>2. Ten years ago, still self pay, I had a bladder infection. The local retail health stop sent out for a test, $90 out of my pocket. It came back negative and the doc said they must have screwed up so he was going to disregard it(!).  So I asked if I was going to get my money back &#8211; and he looked at me like I was crazy. Arg!</p>
<p>It&#8217;s pretty clear to me that there&#8217;s lots of senseless, avoidable waste and a LOT of people in the system figure the waste doesn&#8217;t affect consumers so they don&#8217;t need to do anything about it, nor do they hold each other to ordinary standards of commercial competence. (&#8220;Hey, this didn&#8217;t work &#8211; I&#8217;m not payin&#8217; for it.&#8221;)</p>
<p>And the mechanism that causes this disconnect is the big, thick insulating  factor called insurance, which somehow makes people shrug and think that the waste doesn&#8217;t increase costs or affect care.</p>
<p>We can change this.  All it takes (a big all) is for the people having those &#8220;doesn&#8217;t matter&#8221; conversations to stop accepting that from each other.  I have a sense that this is happening at Beth Israel Deaconess, and I certainly hope it&#8217;s happening at more and more places.</p>
<p>(This is finally starting to change in, for instance, the issue of paying for consequences of medical errors.)</p>
<p>I keep saying that when my family&#8217;s next need arises I want the system to work well.  Every single person who works *in* the system should know they have a personal role in moving things in that direction &#8211; and they can make a difference.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: A Healthy Blog &#187; Paul and Charlie Talk Transparency</title>
		<link>http://blog.hcfama.org/2008/06/16/could-cost-transparency-increase-cost/#comment-1799</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[A Healthy Blog &#187; Paul and Charlie Talk Transparency]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 25 Jun 2008 02:26:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.hcfama.org/?p=1698#comment-1799</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] view is let&#8217;s get this started, and make improvements along the way. Our concern, which we wrote about two days earlier (with two interesting comments added), is whether this is really worth it. Our point, that price transparency may not be too useful, and [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] view is let&#8217;s get this started, and make improvements along the way. Our concern, which we wrote about two days earlier (with two interesting comments added), is whether this is really worth it. Our point, that price transparency may not be too useful, and [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dr. Val</title>
		<link>http://blog.hcfama.org/2008/06/16/could-cost-transparency-increase-cost/#comment-1798</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Dr. Val]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 20 Jun 2008 12:24:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.hcfama.org/?p=1698#comment-1798</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Neiman Marcus effect works when people can afford to shop there. Walmart clientele wouldn&#039;t preferentially select shopping at NM - unless someone else is paying.

Consumers need to have more skin in the game. Price will rapidly become important when it&#039;s coming directly out of their pockets - no one cares about gas when it is $1/gallon.

Primary care can be insurance-free - my doc&#039;s providing a fee/service structure, and it costs me less than a usual deductible plan. He&#039;s available by email/phone 24-7 and I don&#039;t have to go to his office unnecessarily. Make health insurance &quot;sickness insurance.&quot; I agree with Charlie Baker: transparency is a good thing.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The Neiman Marcus effect works when people can afford to shop there. Walmart clientele wouldn&#8217;t preferentially select shopping at NM &#8211; unless someone else is paying.</p>
<p>Consumers need to have more skin in the game. Price will rapidly become important when it&#8217;s coming directly out of their pockets &#8211; no one cares about gas when it is $1/gallon.</p>
<p>Primary care can be insurance-free &#8211; my doc&#8217;s providing a fee/service structure, and it costs me less than a usual deductible plan. He&#8217;s available by email/phone 24-7 and I don&#8217;t have to go to his office unnecessarily. Make health insurance &#8220;sickness insurance.&#8221; I agree with Charlie Baker: transparency is a good thing.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Barry Carol</title>
		<link>http://blog.hcfama.org/2008/06/16/could-cost-transparency-increase-cost/#comment-1797</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Barry Carol]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 18 Jun 2008 18:45:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.hcfama.org/?p=1698#comment-1797</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Suppose insurers tracked utilization by referring doctor and offered incentive payments to those doctors who consistently referred their patients to the most cost-effective (not necessarily the cheapest) specialists, hospitals, imaging centers and labs and prescribed suitable generic drugs when available instead of brand name drugs.  I think that could make a positive difference toward controlling costs.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Suppose insurers tracked utilization by referring doctor and offered incentive payments to those doctors who consistently referred their patients to the most cost-effective (not necessarily the cheapest) specialists, hospitals, imaging centers and labs and prescribed suitable generic drugs when available instead of brand name drugs.  I think that could make a positive difference toward controlling costs.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

