IBJNews

Will ACOs really get off the ground?

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The hype over accountable care organizations—something every major hospital in Indianapolis is moving to become—is increasingly being laced with skepticism as the economics behind the idea get more scrutiny.

Accountable care organizations were one of the key provisions in the 2010 health reform law designed to help reduce the cost of medical care.

The idea is that doctors, hospitals and other health care providers would work together to care for a specific population of patients. By coordinating care, an accountable care organization should be able to reduce errors and avoid duplication of services, thereby saving money. A chunk of the savings would be paid by the federal Medicare program back to the hospitals and doctors in the accountable care organization.

Private health insurers, such as Indianapolis-based WellPoint Inc., want to create similar ACO contracts with hospitals and doctors, in which they would eventually pay “capitated” payments to ACOs for each patient they manage. Such a system would let hospitals and doctors keep whatever money is left over from those payments at the end of the year—or eat whatever overages occurred.

A new paper published by the National Bureau of Economic Research suggests the potential for ACO savings could be 30 percent or more—or it could be a lot less. The question is whether health care providers across the board really embrace the idea, or instead find the idea of gaining market share or gaining market power to be too alluring.

And not everyone—particularly medical device companies and specialists—will come out as winners under ACOs.

“However, we do not know how well ACOs will sidestep cost-ineffective technologies, particularly if the latest shiny innovation increases market share,” wrote Harvard professors Katherine Baicker and Amitabh Chandra in their August paper. “The viability of ACOs will depend on the receptiveness of physicians to capitated payments—some specialists will see their incomes fall and are unlikely to take these cuts quietly. While their concerns may not resonate with patients, they might if providers claim that valuable care is being withheld.”

In anticipation of the ACO concept being implemented by Medicare and private health plans, many hospitals and doctors have been merging, figuring they can work better together if they all work for the same employer. But this consolidation also gives them more heft in negotiating prices with health insurers, note Baicker and Chandra.

“It is worth reiterating, however, that some of the savings from lower quantities may be offset with higher prices as ACOs exert market power,” they wrote.

Even if ACOs could significantly reduce health care spending, there are big questions about whether they will even get off the ground.

The American Hospital Association estimates that small ACOs would need $5.3 million in startup capital investments and another $6.3 million per year for operating costs. For larger ACOs, as would most likely be formed in Indianapolis, the association estimates an initial capital investment of at least $12 million and annual operating expenses of $14 million.

"As the expected payouts from CMS or commercial contracts are yet to be solidified, these substantial costs present a degree of risk that many smaller health care entities may be unable to [make]," concluded a recent report by Health Capital Consultants, a St. Louis-based consulting firm for hospitals and physicians.

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. By Mr. Lee's own admission, he basically ran pro-bono ads on the billboard. Paying advertisers didn't want ads on a controversial, ugly billboard that turned off customers. At least one of Mr. Lee's free advertisers dropped out early because they found that Mr. Lee's advertising was having negative impact. So Mr. Lee is disingenous to say the city now owes him for lost revenue. Mr. Lee quickly realized his monstrosity had a dim future and is trying to get the city to bail him out. And that's why the billboard came down so quickly.

  2. Merchants Square is back. The small strip center to the south of 116th is 100% leased, McAlister’s is doing well in the outlot building. The former O’Charleys is leased but is going through permitting with the State and the town of Carmel. Mac Grill is closing all of their Indy locations (not just Merchants) and this will allow for a new restaurant concept to backfill both of their locations. As for the north side of 116th a new dinner movie theater and brewery is under construction to fill most of the vacancy left by Hobby Lobby and Old Navy.

  3. Yes it does have an ethics commission which enforce the law which prohibits 12 specific items. google it

  4. Thanks for reading and replying. If you want to see the differentiation for research, speaking and consulting, check out the spreadsheet I linked to at the bottom of the post; it is broken out exactly that way. I can only include so much detail in a blog post before it becomes something other than a blog post.

  5. 1. There is no allegation of corruption, Marty, to imply otherwise if false. 2. Is the "State Rule" a law? I suspect not. 3. Is Mr. Woodruff obligated via an employment agreement (contractual obligation) to not work with the engineering firm? 4. In many states a right to earn a living will trump non-competes and other contractual obligations, does Mr. Woodruff's personal right to earn a living trump any contractual obligations that might or might not be out there. 5. Lawyers in state government routinely go work for law firms they were formally working with in their regulatory actions. You can see a steady stream to firms like B&D from state government. It would be interesting for IBJ to do a review of current lawyers and find out how their past decisions affected the law firms clients. Since there is a buffer between regulated company and the regulator working for a law firm technically is not in violation of ethics but you have to wonder if decisions were made in favor of certain firms and quid pro quo jobs resulted. Start with the DOI in this review. Very interesting.

ADVERTISEMENT