Hospitals have pushed back against two senators' policy framework that details a plan to impose site-neutral payments on hospitals.
U.S. Sens. Bill Cassidy, MD, R-La., and Maggie Hassan D-N.H., on Nov. 1 published a paper advocating for site-neutral payments and how the policy would reduce healthcare costs for patients, improve the financial stability of Medicare, reduce provider consolidation and help rural hospitals serving high-need communities.
Site-neutral payment policies would require Medicare to pay the same rate for services delivered regardless of the care site. Medicare payment rates currently recognize fundamental differences between patient care in hospital outpatient departments compared to other settings.
The American Hospital Association argues that this framework would limit critical hospital-based care, leading to increased wait times and decreased access to care for patients.
"It is irresponsible to think that clawing back up to $140 billion of Medicare spending for seniors won't destabilize access to care," AHA Executive Vice President Stacey Hughes said in a statement. "Rather than addressing the root causes driving physician acquisitions, this instead proposes dramatic and untenable Medicare cuts, reducing seniors' access to critical hospital-based care.
The AHA and the Federation of American Hospitals urged Congress to address the "true drivers" of physician acquisitions, including underpayments to providers and care delays and denials by commercial insurers.
"Site-neutral policies equate to Medicare cuts that threaten access to 24/7 hospital care — a framework Congress has rejected time and again," FAH Executive Vice President of Public Affairs Charlene MacDonald said. "Seniors deserve better than tired old policies pushed by the insurance industry that just threaten access to reliable hospital care."