[h=1]Are slower-growing health care costs temporary or permanent?[/h]By Laurie McGinley,
Published: June 18 at 9:00 am
47
Comments
More
It’s one of the hottest debates in health care: Is the historically slow growth in health spending in recent years due to the lingering effects of the recession, or is it a fundamental change that augurs well for the future? The implications are huge – if policymakers think the slowdown is only temporary, they might try to take steps to cut Medicare spending further, for example; if they think the improvement is permanent, they might cross their fingers and hope for the best.
The latest salvos in the battle come from the
Federation of American Hospitals, which represents for-profit hospitals, and
PwC’s Health Research Institute. Both argue in new studies out today that a big chunk of the slowdown is structural -- and won’t disappear as the economy improves.
Dobson DaVanzo & Associates, in a report for the hospital group, concludes that if present trends continue Medicare savings will be $1 trillion more in the next 10 years than the savings projected by the Congressional Budget Office in May. The changes, Al Dobson said in an interview, are the result of marketplace pressures and the Affordable Care Act, which set new penalties for hospital readmissions, and included bundled payments and other incentives for hospitals and doctors to find ways to cut costs without hurting patients.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/06/18/are-slower-growing-health-care-costs-temporary-or-permanent/
you crack me up Ballsack, you're funny.
