Washington,
DC – The Healthcare Supply Chain
Association (HSCA) today applauded the U.S. Government Accountability Office
for its new report, Lack of Price Transparency May Hamper Hospitals’ Ability to
Be Prudent Purchasers of Implantable Medical Devices, which found that pricing
secrecy in the medical device marketplace may drive up healthcare costs for
hospitals and Medicare. The GAO examined pricing information for expensive
implantable medical devices (IMD) and determined that there was substantial
variation in the prices hospitals paid, and that pricing secrecy limited the
ability of hospitals to negotiate for the best price.
“The GAO report confirms what GPOs, hospitals, long-term
care providers, and anyone on the front lines of patient care and healthcare
cost containment see every day: Medical device pricing secrecy decreases
competition, limits the ability of hospitals and their GPO partners to
effectively negotiate for medical products and services, and artificially
drives up healthcare costs, leaving hospitals, Medicare and American taxpayers
to foot the bill,” said HSCA President Curtis Rooney. “We commend Senator
Baucus for asking the GAO for this important report and agree that it raises
‘serious concerns over the prices hospitals and Medicare are forced to pay for
implantable medical devices.’”
The GAO collected pricing information on implantable medical
devices (IMD) from 31 hospitals, 5 group purchasing organizations (GPOs), the
Veterans Affairs health care system, and 8 Department of Defense medical
centers or hospitals.
“Medical device contractual confidentiality agreements,
so-called ‘gag clauses,’ prevent hospitals from sharing data and validating
that they are receiving a fair price on the products they buy. Without GPO benchmarking,
hospitals are often in the dark while negotiating with device manufactures, and
manufacturers are able to charge whatever local markets will bear,” added
Rooney. “The GAO report finds that the contracts between manufacturers and
hospitals often forbid disclosure of prices, even to doctors. The problem is
even more extreme in small and rural markets, where community hospitals often
lack bargaining power in negotiations with Goliath device corporations. As a
result, some hospitals unnecessarily pay thousands of dollars more than others
for high-cost medical devices such as defibrillators, stents and hip
replacements.”
Key findings of the GAO analysis include:
- Price information showed substantial variation in the prices
hospitals paid for the same type of device;
- The lack of price transparency and the substantial variation
in amounts hospitals pay for some implantable medical devices raise questions
about whether hospitals are achieving the best prices possible;
- Excess or unnecessary costs that hospitals incur through
implantable medical device pricing may increase costs to the Medicare program;
- Confidentiality clauses included in IMD contracts bar
hospitals from sharing price information with physicians, making it difficult
to get physicians the information they need to consider cost when making
decisions about devices;
- Some hospitals have substantially less bargaining power with
the small group of companies that manufacture particular implantable medical
devices, and consequently face challenges in obtaining more favorable prices;
- One hospital surveyed paid $8,723 more than another for an
identical model of a device that regulates heart rhythm, which typically costs
hospitals between $16,445 and $19,007;
- One hospital reported spending about $4,500 for a specific
primary total hip construct, while another paid about $8,000 for the same
device construct, or 78 percent more;
- One hospital paid about $5,200 for a primary total knee construct,
while another hospital paid about $9,500 for the same procedure, or 83 percent
more;
- Some hospitals have engaged consulting firms to help gather
data and share benchmarks for IMD costs, but device manufacturers have sued
price consultants to keep costs secret;
- From 2004 through 2009, expenditures for hospital IMD
procedures increased from $16.1 billion to $19.8 billion, an increase of 4.3
percent per year, and an increase in use or orthopedic devices accounted for
the majority of change in that expenditure;
- As the Medicare population grows and beneficiaries expect to
live longer, the demand for implantable medical devices is likely to increase
steadily, and Medicare will continue to be a major payer for procedures
involving IMDs;
- In an environment of increasing health care costs, policymakers
are concerned that the lack of price transparency inhibits competition in the
device market, leading to higher costs for hospitals, and ultimately higher
spending in Medicare;
The GAO found that, although physicians are not involved in
price negotiations, hospitals also must frequently contend with strong
physician-manufacturer relationships and strong physician preferences on
different models of IMD. Physicians rely on manufacturer representatives to
provide technical support during procedures involving IMDs, including setting
up the operating room, consulting with the physician about the procedure, and
programming devices. In addition, some physicians might be loyal to certain
manufacturers with whom they have consulting or professional relationships. If
manufacturers determine that a physician is unwilling to switch device models,
they can be more aggressive in negotiations, which could result in higher
prices for hospitals, according to the GAO.
“The $200 billion medical device industry is able to
leverage its army of salespeople to drive unnecessary utilization and further
enforce contractual ‘gag clauses’ to keep prices a secret, which gives device
makers a virtually unchecked ability to drive up costs for hospitals and
Medicare. Because hospitals are unable to discuss price with the physicians who
typically choose which products to use, hospitals have become third party
payers,” added Rooney. “Hospitals rely on GPOs to deliver the best products at
the best value. The GAO report shows that medical device pricing secrecy is
impeding the ability of hospitals and GPOs to achieve the best possible prices.
At a time when all parties to the healthcare system are trying to rein in
spending, Congress should take steps now to eliminate contractual gag clauses
and increase price transparency in the medical device marketplace.”
For the full GAO report, Lack of Price Transparency May
Hamper Hospitals’ Ability to Be Prudent Purchasers of Implantable Medical
Devices, please visit http://www.gao.gov/assets/590/587688.pdf
About the Healthcare Supply Chain Association (HSCA)
The Healthcare Supply Chain Association, formerly the Health Industry Group
Purchasing Association, is a broad-based trade association that represents 15
group purchasing organizations, including for-profit and not-for-profit
corporations, purchasing groups, associations, multi-hospital systems and
healthcare provider alliances. HSCA’s mission is to advocate on behalf of
healthcare group purchasing associations, to provide educational opportunities
designed to improve efficiencies in the purchase, sale and utilization of all
goods and services within the health industry and to promote meaningful
dialogue between GPOs. For more information, visit www.supplychainassociation.org.