Profits over care? An analysis of the relationship between corporate capitalism in the healthcare industry and cancer mortality in the United States.

The characteristic features of 21st-century corporate capitalism - monopoly and financialization - are increasingly being recognized by public health scholars as undermining the foundations of human health. While the "vectors" through which this is occurring are well known - poverty, inequality, climate change among others - locating the root cause of this process in the nature and institutions of contemporary capitalism is relatively new. Researchers have been somewhat slow to study the relationship between contemporary capitalism and human health. In this paper, we focus on one of the leading causes of death in the United States; cancer, and empirically estimate the relationship between various measures of financialization and monopoly in the US healthcare system and cancer mortality. The measures we focus on are for the hospital industry, the health insurance industry, and the pharmaceutical industry. Using a fixed effects model with different specifications and control variables, our analysis is at the state level for the years 2012-2019. These variables include data on population demographic controls, social and economic factors, and health behavior and clinical care. We compare Medicaid expansion states with non-Medicaid expansion states to investigate variations in state-level funded health insurance coverage. The results show a statistically significant positive correlation between the HHI index in the individual healthcare market and cancer mortality and the opioid dispensing rate and cancer mortality.

Changes in Health Care Workers' Economic Outcomes Following Medicaid Expansion.

Importance: The extent to which changes in health sector finances impact economic outcomes among health care workers, especially lower-income workers, is not well known. Objective: To assess the association between state adoption of the Affordable Care Act's Medicaid expansion-which led to substantial improvements in health care organization finances-and health care workers' annual incomes and benefits, and whether these associations varied across low- and high-wage occupations. Design, Setting, and Participants: Difference-in-differences analysis to assess differential changes in health care workers' economic outcomes before and after Medicaid expansion among workers in 30 states that expanded Medicaid relative to workers in 16 states that did not, by examining US individuals aged 18 through 65 years employed in the health care industry surveyed in the 2010-2019 American Community Surveys. Exposure: Time-varying state-level adoption of Medicaid expansion. Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary outcome was annual earned income; secondary outcomes included receipt of employer-sponsored health insurance, Medicaid, and Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program benefits. Results: The sample included 1 322 263 health care workers from 2010-2019. Health care workers in expansion states were similar to those in nonexpansion states in age, sex, and educational attainment, but those in expansion states were less likely to identify as non-Hispanic Black. Medicaid expansion was associated with a 2.16% increase in annual incomes (95% CI, 0.66%-3.65%; P = .005). This effect was driven by significant increases in annual incomes among the top 2 highest-earning quintiles (ß coefficient, 2.91%-3.72%), which includes registered nurses, physicians, and executives. Health care workers in lower-earning quintiles did not experience any significant changes. Medicaid expansion was associated with a 3.15 percentage point increase in the likelihood that a health care worker received Medicaid benefits (95% CI, 2.46 to 3.84; P < .001), with the largest increases among the 2 lowest-earning quintiles, which includes health aides, orderlies, and sanitation workers. There were significant decreases in employer-sponsored health insurance and increases in SNAP following Medicaid expansion. Conclusion and Relevance: Medicaid expansion was associated with increases in compensation for health care workers, but only among the highest earners. These findings suggest that improvements in health care sector finances may increase economic inequality among health care workers, with implications for worker health and well-being.

Salve Lucrum: The Existential Threat of Greed in US Health Care.

In this Viewpoint, Donald Berwick explores the pursuit of profit in US health care across sectors­such as pharmaceutical companies, insurers, hospitals, and physician practices­and its harms to patients, and then offers potential solutions.

Healthcare supply chain risk management in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil: What is the current situation?

BACKGROUND: Public hospital managers in Rio de Janeiro must deal with severe budget costs, which is the only source of income of public hospitals. In this sense, systematic supply chain risk management can contribute to identifying such risks, assessing their severity, and developing mitigating plans, or even revealing the lack of such plans. Private hospital networks must also map their risks since they are facing a diminishing of demand given that unemployment in Brazil, which is growing in the past years, generates an impossibility of affording private healthcare. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this paper is to investigate how supply chain risk management is being applied in healthcare supply chains from Rio de Janeiro - Brazil. This study considers supply chains located in the state of Rio de Janeiro. To accomplish this objective, we provide answers to two Research Questions: RQ1 - Is SCRM known as a concept among Rio de Janeiro healthcare supply chains? RQ2 - How are risk identification, risk assessment, and risk mitigation being implemented by companies from the healthcare supply chains in Rio de Janeiro - Brazil? METHOD: Our research design is based on four steps: i) Research design; ii) Case selection: iii) Data collection (11 cases selected); iv) Data analysis. RESULTS: The interviews revealed that SCRM is an entirely unknown concept among healthcare supply chains from Rio de Janeiro - Brazil. Managers have empirical knowledge of the risks, and they can identify the most hazardous risks and can come up with solutions to mitigate them, nevertheless, in many situations they do not have the authority or the manpower to implement the solutions, at most, managers implement local risk mitigation initiatives that do not consider the supply chains broader context. CONCLUSION: The healthcare organizations studied by this paper do not apply SCRM. They only apply local isolated solutions not considering a supply chain scope. This can become hazardous since isolated risk mitigation initiatives are often innocuous and have the potential to generate other risks.

Fulfilling the Promise of Artificial Intelligence in the Health Sector: Let's Get Real.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to showcase the potential and key concerns and risks of artificial intelligence (AI) in the health sector, illustrating its application with current examples, and to provide policy guidance for the development, assessment, and adoption of AI technologies to advance policy objectives. METHODS: Nonsystematic scan and analysis of peer-reviewed and gray literature on AI in the health sector, focusing on key insights for policy and governance. RESULTS: The application of AI in the health sector is currently in the early stages. Most applications have not been scaled beyond the research setting. The use in real-world clinical settings is especially nascent, with more evidence in public health, biomedical research, and "back office" administration. Deploying AI in the health sector carries risks and hazards that must be managed proactively by policy makers. For AI to produce positive health and policy outcomes, 5 key areas for policy are proposed, including health data governance, operationalizing AI principles, flexible regulation, skills among health workers and patients, and strategic public investment. CONCLUSIONS: AI is not a panacea, but a tool to address specific problems. Its successful development and adoption require data governance that ensures high-quality data are available and secure; relevant actors can access technical infrastructure and resources; regulatory frameworks promote trustworthy AI products; and health workers and patients have the information and skills to use AI products and services safely, effectively, and efficiently. All of this requires considerable investment and international collaboration.

Otolaryngologists Trail Other Specialties in Industry Payments From Dermal Filler Companies.

OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: Dermal filler (DF) is a widely used nonsurgical option for facial rejuvenation with a rapidly expanding market. Physician payments by DF industry leaders have yet to be characterized. We sought to investigate trends in physician-industry payments by DF companies over 6 years. Differences in payments based on physician specialty and time were characterized. STUDY DESIGN: Database review. METHODS: The Open Payments Database was queried from 2013 to 2018. Payments made by the three largest DF companies by market share to otolaryngologists, plastic surgeons, and dermatologists were analyzed. Total dollars paid, number of payments made, type of payments made, and total number of specialists paid were recorded. One-way ANOVA was used for statistical analysis. RESULTS: Otolaryngologists, plastic surgeons, and dermatologists received average annual payments of $0.36 million, $6.3 million, and $6.6 million respectively (P < .001). An average of 330 otolaryngologists, 2,128 plastic surgeons, and 5,980 dermatologists were paid annually (P < .001). Accredited speaking arrangements, consulting fees, and royalty/licensing fees comprised the majority of dollars paid to physicians. CONCLUSIONS: Average physician payment by DF companies exceeds $12 million annually, with otolaryngologists receiving significantly less compared to plastic surgeons and dermatologists. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: NA Laryngoscope, 132:301-306, 2022.

A Guide to Industry Payments and an Algorithm for Their Management.

BACKGROUND: The Open Payments database was created to increase transparency of industry payment relationships within medicine. The current literature often examines only 1 year of the database. In this study, the authors use 5 years of data to show trends among industry payments to plastic surgeons from 2014 to 2018. In addition, the authors lay out the basics of conflict-of-interest reporting for the new plastic surgeon. Finally, the authors suggest an algorithm for the responsible management of industry relationships. METHODS: This study analyzed nonresearch payments made to plastic surgeons from January 1, 2014, to December 31, 2018. Descriptive statistics were calculated using R Statistical Software and visualized using Tableau. RESULTS: A total of 304,663 payments totaling $140,889,747 were made to 8148 plastic surgeons; 41 percent ($58.28 million) was paid to 50 plastic surgeons in the form of royalty or license payments. With royalties excluded, average and median payments were $276 and $25. The average yearly total per physician was $2028. Of the 14 payment categories, 95 percent of the total amount paid was attributable payments in one of six categories. Seven hundred thirty companies reported payments to plastic surgeons from 2014 to 2018; 15 companies (2 percent) were responsible for 80 percent ($66.34 million) of the total sum paid. Allergan was responsible for $24.45 million (29.6 percent) of this amount. CONCLUSIONS: Although discussions on the proper management of industry relationships continue to evolve, the data in this study illustrate the importance of managing industry relationships. The simple guidelines suggested create a basis for managing industry relationships in the career of the everyday plastic surgeon.

Industry Payments to Plastic Surgeons, 2013 to 2018: Who's Getting Paid?

BACKGROUND: The Physician Payments Sunshine Act of 2010 mandated that all industry payments to physicians be publicly disclosed. To date, industry support of plastic surgeons has not been longitudinally characterized. The authors seek to evaluate payment trends from 2013 to 2018 and characteristics across plastic surgeon recipients of industry payments. METHODS: The authors cross-referenced those in the 2019 American Society of Plastic Surgeons member database with Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Open Payments database physician profile identification number indicating industry funds received within the study period. We categorized surgeons by years since American Board of Plastic Surgery certification, practice region, and academic affiliation. RESULTS: A sum of $89,436,100 (247,614 payments) was received by 3855 plastic surgeons. The top 1 percent of earners (n = 39) by dollar amount received 52 percent of industry dollars to plastic surgeons; of these, nine (23 percent) were academic. Overall, 428 surgeons (11 percent) were academic and received comparable dollar amounts from industry as their nonacademic counterparts. Neither geographic location nor years of experience were independent predictors of payments received. The majority of individual transactions were for food and beverage, whereas the majority of industry dollars were typically for royalties or license. CONCLUSIONS: Over half of all industry dollars transferred went to just 1 percent of American Society of Plastic Surgeons members receiving payments between 2013 and 2018. Considerable heterogeneity exists when accounting for payment subcategories.

Association between Industry Payments and Published Position on Use of Devices for the Treatment of Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the impact of industry payments to authors of opinion articles on the Urolift and Rezum devices. We also examined the extent to which authors omitted acknowledgements of financial conflicts-of-interest. METHODS: We searched Google Scholar for all articles that cite either of the respective pivotal trials for these devices. 2 blinded urologists coded the articles as favorable or neutral. A separate blinded researcher recorded industry payments from the manufacturers using the Open Payments Program database. RESULTS: We identified 29 articles written by 27 unique authors from an initial screening list of 235 articles. Of these articles, 15 (52%) were coded as positive and 14 (48%) were coded as neutral. 20 (74%) authors have accepted payments from the manufacturer of the device. Since 2014, these authors have collectively received $270,000 from NeoTract and $314,000 from Boston Scientific. Of the 20 authors with payments, 9 (45%) received more than $10,000 from either manufacturer. Of authors with payments, 65% (13/20) contributed to only positive articles. Authors who received payments had more than 4 times the number of article contributions than did authors without payments (42 vs 10). Authors of at least one favorable article were more likely to have received payments from the device manufacturers than authors of neutral articles (P = .014, Chi-squared test). Most (80%, 16/20) authors with payments did not report a relevant conflict-of-interest within any of their articles. CONCLUSION: These data suggest a relationship between payments from a manufacturer and positive published position on that company's device. There may be a critical lack of published editorial pieces by authors without financial conflicts of interest.

Evaluating the impact of single exit pricing (SEP) on medicine product withdrawal from the private healthcare market in South Africa.

BACKGROUND: The introduction of medicine pricing policies in South Africa (SA) in the form of single exit pricing (SEP) provided a mechanism to improve medicine price transparency and reduce the medicine price and inflation. However, regulation of medicine prices may have further unforeseen effects on the availability of medicine. This research presents the impact of SEP on discontinuation of medicine products on the private healthcare market in SA. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the impact of SEP legislation on the availability of medicines in the SA private health sector in terms of withdrawal of medicines from the market. METHODS: A descriptive, quantitative analysis of all registered medicines on the SA market by stock-keeping units (SKUs) was done to establish medicine products that were withdrawn from the market by SKUs during a 14-year period (2001 - 2014). RESULTS: A total of 152 manufacturers discontinued 3 691 SKUs between 2001 and 2014. The mean number of discontinuations per generic manufacturer was 22.34 (standard deviation (SD) 58.11), while innovator manufacturers discontinued a mean of 27.61 (41.89). The largest number of SKUs were commercially withdrawn in 2002 (n=603), followed by discontinuations in 2003 (n=463) and 2004 (n=407). There was a negative correlation between number of discontinued SKUs per year and SEP increase (Pearson's correlation coefficient r ‒0.414; p=0.14). The results showed that SEP and a transparent pricing policy may have had an impact on SKU withdrawal from the market prior to SEP implementation. CONCLUSIONS: The result of reduced product availability on the market and its impact on the cost and quality of healthcare to the patient need to be regularly monitored and evaluated to ascertain if direct price regulations achieve the intended outcomes. Other intended or unintended effects on pharmaceutical market dynamics should also be evaluated.

Mapping conflict of interests: scoping review.

OBJECTIVE: To identify all known ties between the medical product industry and the healthcare ecosystem. DESIGN: Scoping review. METHODS: From initial literature searches and expert input, a map was created to show the network of medical product industry ties across parties and activities in the healthcare ecosystem. Through a scoping review, the ties were then verified, cataloged, and characterized, with data abstracted on types of industry ties (financial, non-financial), applicable policies for conflict of interests, and publicly available data sources. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Presence and types of medical product industry ties to activities and parties, presence of policies for conflict of interests, and publicly available data. RESULTS: A map derived through synthesis of 538 articles from 37 countries shows an extensive network of medical product industry ties to activities and parties in the healthcare ecosystem. Key activities include research, healthcare education, guideline development, formulary selection, and clinical care. Parties include non-profit entities, the healthcare profession, the market supply chain, and government. The medical product industry has direct ties to all parties and some activities through multiple pathways; direct ties extend through interrelationships among parties and activities. The most frequently identified parties were within the healthcare profession, with individual professionals described in 422 (78%) of the included studies. More than half (303, 56%) of the publications documented medical product industry ties to research, with clinical care (156, 29%), health professional education (145, 27%), guideline development (33, 6%), and formulary selection (8, 1%) appearing less often. Policies for conflict of interests exist for some financial and a few non-financial ties; publicly available data sources seldom describe or quantify these ties. CONCLUSIONS: An extensive network of medical product industry ties to activities and parties exists in the healthcare ecosystem. Policies for conflict of interests and publicly available data are lacking, suggesting that enhanced oversight and transparency are needed to protect patient care from commercial influence and to ensure public trust.

Association of a Medicare Outpatient Payment Reform With Hospital-Primary Care Integration: Heterogeneity Across Markets and Physicians.

BACKGROUND: Hospital-physician integration increased rapidly in the past decade, threatening the affordability of care with minimal gains in quality. Medicare recently reformed its facility fee payments to hospitals for office consultations delivered by hospital-integrated physicians. This policy reform, affecting 200 million office visits annually, may have inadvertently encouraged hospitals to integrate with certain primary care physicians. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to determine whether the policy reform was associated with hospital-primary care integration. RESEARCH DESIGN: I used a large sample of primary care physicians (n=98,884) drawn from Medicare claims data. I estimated cross-sectional multivariable linear probability models to measure whether the change in physicians' value-to-hospitals was associated with integration. RESULTS: The reform created heterogenous results: some physicians' value-to-hospitals decreased, while others increased (first percentile to 99th percentile, -$16,000 to $47,000). This change in value had a small association with integration: for every $10,000 increase, a physician was about 0.34 percentage points (95% confidence interval: 0.16-0.52) more likely to become integrated. Among high-volume physicians, the reform had larger effects: physicians whose value-to-hospitals grew by $20,000 or more were nearly 3 percentage points more likely to become integrated. Changes in value had no effect in concentrated hospital markets and rural areas. CONCLUSIONS: Effects of Medicare's site-based payments on hospital-primary care integration were concentrated among a small subset of physicians. Reforms to Medicare payment policy could influence integration among this group.