IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0157912.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Assessing the Complex and Evolving Relationship between Charges and Payments in US Hospitals: 1996 – 2012

Author

Listed:
  • Hannah Hamavid
  • Maxwell Birger
  • Anne G Bulchis
  • Liya Lomsadze
  • Jonathan Joseph
  • Ranju Baral
  • Anthony L Bui
  • Cody Horst
  • Elizabeth Johnson
  • Joseph L Dieleman

Abstract

Background: In 2013 the United States spent $2.9 trillion on health care, more than in any previous year. Much of the debate around slowing health care spending growth focuses on the complicated pricing system for services. Our investigation contributes to knowledge of health care spending by assessing the relationship between charges and payments in the inpatient hospital setting. In the US, charges and payments differ because of a complex set of incentives that connect health care providers and funders. Our methodology can also be applied to adjust charge data to reflect actual spending. Methods: We extracted cause of health care encounter (cause), primary payer (payer), charge, and payment information for 50,172 inpatient hospital stays from 1996 through 2012. We used linear regression to assess the relationship between charges and payments, stratified by payer, year, and cause. We applied our estimates to a large, nationally representative hospital charge sample to estimate payments. Results: The average amount paid per $1 charged varies significantly across three dimensions: payer, year, and cause. Among the 10 largest causes of health care spending, average payments range from 23 to 55 cents per dollar charged. Over time, the amount paid per dollar charged is decreasing for those with private or public insurance, signifying that inpatient charges are increasing faster than the amount insurers pay. Conversely, the amount paid by out-of-pocket payers per dollar charged is increasing over time for several causes. Applying our estimates to a nationally representative hospital charge sample generates payment estimates which align with the official US estimates of inpatient spending. Conclusions: The amount paid per $1 charged fluctuates significantly depending on the cause of a health care encounter and the primary payer. In addition, the amount paid per charge is changing over time. Transparent accounting of hospital spending requires a detailed assessment of the substantial and growing gap between charges and payments. Understanding what is driving this divergence and generating accurate spending estimates can inform efforts to contain health care spending.

Suggested Citation

  • Hannah Hamavid & Maxwell Birger & Anne G Bulchis & Liya Lomsadze & Jonathan Joseph & Ranju Baral & Anthony L Bui & Cody Horst & Elizabeth Johnson & Joseph L Dieleman, 2016. "Assessing the Complex and Evolving Relationship between Charges and Payments in US Hospitals: 1996 – 2012," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(7), pages 1-15, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0157912
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0157912
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0157912
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0157912&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0157912?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jeffrey Clemens & Joshua D. Gottlieb, 2017. "In the Shadow of a Giant: Medicare’s Influence on Private Physician Payments," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 125(1), pages 1-39.
    2. Waters, Hugh R. & Anderson, Gerard F. & Mays, Jim, 2004. "Measuring financial protection in health in the United States," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 69(3), pages 339-349, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ashantha Ranasinghe & Xuejuan Su, 2023. "When social assistance meets market power: A mixed duopoly view of health insurance in the United States," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 61(4), pages 851-869, October.
    2. Mohammad Abu-Zaineh & Habiba Romdhane & Bruno Ventelou & Jean-Paul Moatti & Arfa Chokri, 2013. "Appraising financial protection in health: the case of Tunisia," International Journal of Health Economics and Management, Springer, vol. 13(1), pages 73-93, March.
    3. Berta, Paolo & Guerriero, Carla & Levaggi, Rosella, 2021. "Hospitals’ strategic behaviours and patient mobility: Evidence from Italy," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
    4. Jeffrey Clemens & Joshua D. Gottlieb & Adam Hale Shapiro, 2016. "Medicare payment cuts continue to restrain inflation," FRBSF Economic Letter, Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco.
    5. Baird, Katherine Elizabeth, 2016. "The incidence of high medical expenses by health status in seven developed countries," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(1), pages 26-34.
    6. Craig, Stuart V. & Ericson, Keith Marzilli & Starc, Amanda, 2021. "How important is price variation between health insurers?," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
    7. Dunn, Abe & Shapiro, Adam Hale, 2015. "Physician payments under health care reform," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 89-105.
    8. Hsing-Wen Han & Hsien-Ming Lien & Tzu-Ting Yang, 2020. "Patient Cost-Sharing and Healthcare Utilization in Early Childhood: Evidence from a Regression Discontinuity Design," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 12(3), pages 238-278, August.
    9. Cook, Amanda & Averett, Susan, 2020. "Do hospitals respond to changing incentive structures? Evidence from Medicare’s 2007 DRG restructuring," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 73(C).
    10. Richard Mussa, 2016. "Exit from catastrophic health payments: a method and an application to Malawi," International Journal of Health Economics and Management, Springer, vol. 16(2), pages 163-174, June.
    11. Benjamin R. Handel & Jonathan T. Kolstad, 2021. "The Affordable Care Act After a Decade: Industrial Organization of the Insurance Exchanges," NBER Working Papers 29178, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    12. Nicholas Benson & Jose Joaquin Lopez, 2024. "Surgeons' response to reimbursement changes for alternative procedures: Evidence from spine fusion in the U.S," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 42(1), pages 41-55, January.
    13. Gautam Gowrisankaran & Keith A. Joiner & Jianjing Lin, 2016. "How do Hospitals Respond to Payment Incentives?," NBER Working Papers 22873, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    14. Wagstaff, Adam & Lindelow, Magnus, 2008. "Can insurance increase financial risk?: The curious case of health insurance in China," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 27(4), pages 990-1005, July.
    15. Toren L. Fronsdal & Jay Bhattacharya & Suzanne Tamang, 2020. "Variation in Health Care Prices Across Public and Private Payers," NBER Working Papers 27490, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    16. Attema, Arthur E. & Galizzi, Matteo M. & Groß, Mona & Hennig-Schmidt, Heike & Karay, Yassin & L’Haridon, Olivier & Wiesen, Daniel, 2023. "The formation of physician altruism," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 87(C).
    17. Abe Dunn & Joshua D Gottlieb & Adam Hale Shapiro & Daniel J Sonnenstuhl & Pietro Tebaldi, 2024. "A Denial a Day Keeps the Doctor Away," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 139(1), pages 187-233.
    18. repec:aei:journl:y:2020:id:1008559492 is not listed on IDEAS
    19. Stan Veuger & Jeffrey Clemens, 2015. "Innovation and uncertainty in the medical industry: Evidence from the case of Myriad Genetics, Inc," AEI Economics Working Papers 834894, American Enterprise Institute.
    20. Jeffrey Clemens & Stan Veuger, 2017. "Risks To The Returns To Medical Innovation: The Case Of Myriad Genetics," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 35(2), pages 345-357, April.
    21. Johnston, Bridget M. & Burke, Sara & Barry, Sarah & Normand, Charles & Ní Fhallúin, Maebh & Thomas, Steve, 2019. "Private health expenditure in Ireland: Assessing the affordability of private financing of health care," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 123(10), pages 963-969.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0157912. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.