Research by researchers at the Brown University Public Health School has almost half (PCP) in the hospital, while the number of PCPs belonging to a private equity company is in specific areas. It indicates that it is growing and concentrated. market.
Compared to independent Practis PCPs, people who belong to hospitals and private equity companies have charged higher prices for the same service.
The survey results were published Jamahels Forum.
The integration of healthcare is the driving force of the US medical price, and said Yashaswini Singh, an assistant professor of medical services, policies, and practice that belongs to the center to promote health policy through brown research. 。
Shin said that it was difficult to quantify the trend due to lack of data on the integration of primary care doctors.
If the price and ownership is not transparent, it is impossible to really understand the tendency of primary care integration and corporateization, and ultimately give them to you and I pay for you. What is the impact? “
Yashaswini Singh, assistant professor of health services, policies, practice, and author
According to Shin, it is necessary to disclose internal negotiations fees due to recent coverage rules that require health insurance companies to disclose the negotiations in internal network for all services and all contracted medical experts. there is.
Researchers have analyzed a total of 198,097 primary care providers and 226.6 million negotiations. They first identified the private stock -related PCP, which belonged to the hospital, and linked the information to the price setting data derived from the transparency of the coverage data set.
They discovered that primary care from the hospital increased from 25.2 % in 2009 to 47.9 % in 2022. During the same period, 1.5 % of US PCPs belonged to private equity companies. Although the number looks small, Shin stated that the localized integrated model tends to be more prominent in specific regional markets in Texas and Florida.
Compared to independent PCPs, the negotiations for office visits were 10.7 % higher in hospitals and 7.8 % for private stocks.
These differences in prices lasted regardless of insurance company.
“Our samples include the largest national health insurance companies, and despite their scale and power, can the insurance company lower the price in negotiations with these entities? , Suggesting that there is no intention, “said Shin.
In particular, Primary Care, especially in primary care, is not a problem, especially in primary care, especially due to lack of investment. However, she said that integration is not related to reinvestments that improve quality and care.
“If it expanded access to care or attracted a professional talented doctor, it may be better to pay,” said Shin. “However, from the long -term data in health economics and health policies, it seems that the higher prices generally from integration have not been reinvested in the way to improve the quality of patient care and the compensation received by doctors.”
She added as follows. And the question is as follows. Are these higher prices returned to investors and executive pockets, not in a way to improve overall care experiences and labor experience? “
In this study, researchers have given the recent changes in medical organizations and are useful for the guidance of medical market competitive policies, which can be used for the recent changes in medical organizations. I mentioned. This type of study pointed out that it could help identify a wide range of fluctuations paid to doctors’ services observed throughout the geographical region for similar services.
Additional research contributors include Brown’s Christopher White, Nandita Rada Clycnans, and Lauren Adler of the Brookings Research Institute.
sauce:
Journal Reference:
Shin, Y. ,, et al. (2025). Private equity and hospital integration on primary care and prices. Jamahels Forum。 doi.org/10.1001/jamahealthforum.2024.4935。
