Heard on All Things Considered
By Bram Sable-Smith

By Christopher Snowbeck

This article quotes Brown University researchers Chris Whaley and Roslyn Murray from the CAHPR, who explain that wide hospital price differences across Rhode Island stem less from care quality and more from market consolidation. Whaley noted that “there’s really not a strong relationship between price and quality,” while Murray pointed to “empire-building tactics” and consolidation that give large health systems leverage to raise prices and obscure transparency

On October 6, 2025, California Governor Gavin Newsom signed SB 351, aimed at limiting the involvement of private equity groups and hedge funds in health care practices.

This article discusses a Brown University study showing that commercial insurers pay nearly $1,500 more per procedure at hospital outpatient departments than at ambulatory surgical centers. The findings highlight large price variations across insurers and suggest opportunities for cost savings through selective contracting or site-neutral payment reforms.

Hospitals are discouraging infection testing to avoid Medicare penalties, a practice clinicians say jeopardizes patient safety and skews public reporting. As Brown University’s Andrew Ryan put it, “Basically, the measures are just really, really bad … this is honestly the worst” pay-for-performance program, underscoring deep flaws in how infection penalties are designed and enforced.

UnitedHealth’s Medicare Advantage program has come under scrutiny for allegedly exploiting diagnostic “upcoding” practices that drive billions in excess federal payments. Brown University researchers have launched Medicoding.org, a public tool that tracks how diagnostic coding in Medicare Advantage inflates payments to insurers. Health economist David Meyers explains that while some coding reflects real patient needs, much of the increase stems from insurers “gaming the system,” making beneficiaries appear sicker than they are

Republican lawmakers pressed for stricter oversight of nonprofit hospitals at a House hearing, arguing that many exploit tax exemptions while providing limited charity care. Witnesses, including Brown University’s Christopher Whaley, highlighted that current reporting structures obscure hospital-level community benefit, and urged stronger, more transparent requirements to ensure accountability.

In testimony before Congress, Brown University researcher Christopher Whaley revealed that many nonprofit hospitals reap massive financial benefits yet spend far less on community health than their tax exemptions are worth. With bipartisan concern mounting, Whaley urged reforms to ensure tax breaks translate into affordable, high-quality care for patients — not executive perks or stadium sponsorships.

This article reports on a Health Affairs study led by Brown University researchers analyzed over a decade of private equity acquisitions in opioid treatment programs across 43 states. The findings show that despite rapid growth in private equity ownership, there were no measurable improvements in methadone access, treatment expansion, or opioid-related mortality

A new Health Affairs study reveals that hundreds of urban hospitals have secured “Medicare administratively rural” status—unlocking benefits meant for rural communities. While CMS prepares to roll out its $50 billion Rural Health Transformation Program, the findings raise concerns about loopholes, misaligned incentives, and whether subsidizing facilities truly improves access for rural patients.

This article talks about a Health Affairs study led by researchers at CAHPR, University of Pittsburgh and the RAND Corporation on the current PE ownership of opioid treatment programs in the US. Despite acquiring large shares of the market, PE firms are not expanding access to methadone—leaving the treatment gap largely unchanged.

The proposed sale of two safety net hospitals — from private equity-backed Prospect Medical Holdings to the nonprofit Centurion Foundation — has been closely watched across the state. The Attorney General's updated terms for the sale reflect growing concern over the role of private equity in Rhode Island’s health care system.

A large number of nonprofit hospitals located in urban cities are exploiting a Medicare definition that allows them to be considered both “urban” and “rural” simultaneously, letting them tap generous benefits and reimbursement models specifically intended for rural communities.

Drugmakers are experimenting with direct-to-consumer sales in response to Trump’s push for lower drug prices, aiming to bypass traditional middlemen like PBMs. While the strategy could reshape how patients access medications, experts warn its impact on affordability, safety, and equity remains uncertain.

Traditional Medicare plan holders have typically not had to wait for prior authorization before receiving medical treatment. CMS recently announced a new program to test prior authorization requirements for certain services in six states to root out fraud, waste and abuse. Jeffrey Marr highlights what’s needed to set up a well-functioning prior authorization system.

Another news article speaks on a study published in Health Affairs that reveals a sharp rise in urban hospitals reclassifying themselves as "rural" under Medicare rules, allowing them to access financial benefits intended for rural health providers. Researchers warn that this loophole could redirect billions in federal funds away from genuinely rural hospitals and urge policymakers to take corrective action.

Hundreds of large, urban hospitals have taken advantage of a 2016 policy change to classify themselves as both urban and rural, allowing them to access financial benefits meant for rural hospitals. Researchers warn that this loophole could divert billions in taxpayer funds away from actual rural communities and into already well-funded urban hospitals unless policymakers intervene.

This piece, authored by Hayden Rooke-Ley, argues that while the Trump administration’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act threatens to gut Medicaid funding by nearly $1 trillion over a decade, states still have powerful tools to protect coverage and even strengthen their healthcare systems. By capping inflated prices in the private insurance market and redirecting those savings to Medicaid—where every dollar is federally matched—states can blunt the impact of federal cuts, support vulnerable providers, and reduce systemic inequities.

The article investigates how major drugmakers like Pfizer and Eli Lilly are paying telehealth companies millions of dollars to connect patients to providers, raising concerns about potential conflicts of interest and violations of anti-kickback laws. While both companies deny influencing prescriptions, lawmakers and experts worry these partnerships may steer patients toward expensive branded drugs and allow pharma firms to collect detailed patient data.

This article talks about two commentaries by Hayden Rooke-Ley that argue that neoliberal, profit-driven models of U.S. healthcare—particularly privatized Medicare and value-based payment—have failed patients by prioritizing corporate interests over access and quality of care. He calls for a shift to a publicly governed, single-payer system that removes financial conflicts of interest and restores decision-making to non-commercial entities and caregivers.

This article covers a study in JAMA Health Forum finds that private equity-acquired gastroenterology practices significantly raised colonoscopy prices without any improvement in quality of care. The rise in costs was especially steep in highly consolidated markets, where prices surged by 6.7%. With no measurable gains in patient outcomes, the findings raise broader concerns about the impact of PE’s profit-driven model on healthcare affordability, transparency, and value.

This article argues that despite Massachusetts’ recent reforms after the collapse of Steward Health Care, a major loophole still allows private equity to control medical practices through shell companies and “friendly physician” arrangements. Drawing on the century-old corporate practice of medicine (CPOM) doctrine, the article calls for stronger legal restrictions like those recently passed in Oregon to protect patient care from financial interests.