This report reveals that consumers in just one Massachusetts county could have saved nearly $22 million in a single year and $116.6 million adjusted for inflation over four years if they switched from using the most expensive providers for 16 shoppable healthcare services to those whose prices were closer to average.

This report finds that most new drug pricing transparency laws do not lower consumer out-of-pocket costs, and that expensive and onerous compliance rules would likely put upward pressure on prices. The report reviews recent New England legislative attempts to reduce costs by requiring the disclosure of wholesale drug prices and other information about industry pricing practices.

Regardless of what happens in the debate over repealing and replacing the ACA in D.C., Massachusetts has to tackle health care costs intelligently. We need to do more than provide insurance; we need to increase access to care. That means thinking seriously about the role of private market insurers, insurance regulations and the regulation of medical providers.

Submitted to the Special Commission on Provider Price Variation on January 31, 2017

This policy brief is the third in a series of reports on healthcare price transparency prepared by Pioneer Institute. Researchers surveyed six major metropolitan areas and spoke with 54 acute care hospitals across those regions: Des Moines, IA, Raleigh-Durham, NC, Orlando, FL, Dallas-Ft. Worth, TX, New York, NY and Los Angeles, CA asking for the price of an MRI of the left knee without contrast. In addition, they explored the existence of federal and state laws that might apply in the states where the hospitals surveyed are located. They also examined the websites of the 54 hospitals for price information. The results of this survey are described in this policy brief.

Pioneer Institute surveyed 22 out of approximately 66 Massachusetts acute care hospitals and 10 free-standing clinics seeking prices for one common procedure - an MRI of the left knee without contrast.  While Pioneer was ultimately able to get the information from all 10 clinics and 21 of the 22 hospitals, the process was time consuming, confusing and replete with long rounds of telephone tag.

This brief is part of an occasional series from Pioneer Institute examining the direct effects of the ACA on Massachusetts. Please see the end of the paper for more examples.

This report is the final report in a series of four. Earlier reports in this series evaluated access to health insurance and health care, equitable and sustainable financing, and administrative efficiency. The focus of this report will be on cost-effective quality, and the analysis will be organized by the four "Scorecard Metric,' presented in Figure 1. 

The focus of this report is on the reduction of barriers to access.