Health policy experts react to new report on proposed Lifespan-Care New England merger

“Rhode Island’s fully integrated academic medical center can combine cutting-edge research with renowned medical expertise to improve the quality of care. Advanced biomedical discoveries; medicine, public health. , And educate future leaders in biomedical engineering. It will create a vibrant impetus for the state’s economy, “reads a report from research firm Tripp Umbach, Brown, Lifespan, Care New England. Reflects previous statements made by executives in.

However, health policy experts said the report, commissioned by Brown University and costing $ 90,000, was flawed and relied on unclear data.

Lauren Adler, associate director of the Brookings Schaefer Health Policy Initiative at the University of Southern California, said many universities make money from their associated hospitals.

“But it’s still a bit unpleasant to see the paid” research “pushed out by a respected university flying in the face of a large amount of evidence from academic literature. ” Tweet Adler. Its research areas include insurance markets, provider payments, prescription drugs, Medicare, and affordable care methods.

Jason Baxbaum, a PhD candidate for health policy at Harvard University, said: Tweet, “This analysis is a bit self-serving.”

Christopher Coller, Chairman of the Milbank Memorial Fund, Responded, “Mindreel. Who needs proof to ask a consultant? Is there proof from your own faculty?”

Alan Joseph, a pediatric critical care fellow at the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center Children’s Hospital, said: twitter Here he states that he has followed the twists and turns of Lifespan and Care New England’s trading history, and is not surprised that they have asked for “positive research” with the help of Brown University.

“It’s a kind of par of the course here,” he said.

In the report, author and company president Paul Unbach argued that the healthcare system is expected to provide more people across the country with low-cost, high-quality medical care. These demands “only by an integrated healthcare system that monitors a large patient population are good at using advanced tools to manage population health,” he writes.

Joseph called it a “controversial controversy.”

“I think it’s true that alternative payment models like ACO are aimed at integrative medicine systems, but I don’t think this is the only way to do that,” Joseph said.

The report also said that out-of-state purchases of Rhode Island hospitals had a “bad effect” and “accelerating the transfer of quality specialty care outside the state.”

It’s worth noting that the report argued that the merger was better for the state’s economy than it would be for out-of-state buyers, Joseph said.

“It’s not a typical argument in antitrust procedures,” he said.

The report compares the Providence healthcare market with the Pittsburgh healthcare market. Pittsburgh states that it has the highest percentage of employment in scientific medicine in all markets across the country. However, there is a big difference between the two cities. According to the US Census Bureau, Providence has a population of 179,494, while Pittsburgh has a population of over 302,000. And Providence is much closer to both Boston and New York City than Pittsburgh has in Philadelphia’s medical services.

“Road Island is a very unique and very small market and is always present in the context of the New York City and Boston market shadows (and),” said Senior Health Policy Analyst, Faculty of Public Health, Boston University. Elsa Pearson said. Gloves. “Even if Rhode Island creates a scientific medicine department … there is a lot of competition. It’s a bit naive to believe that the new system is in a vacuum, independent of the existing one.”

“Just because’XYZ’has happened in Pittsburgh doesn’t mean it happens in Providence,” she said. “Be careful when looking at the data and guessing how trends will move into new markets.”

James Bailey, a professor of economics at the University of Providence, who specializes in health economics, said the central issue with this report was that it was “opaque” and did not cite most sources of that number. Said that.

“And the entire’methodology’section is one paragraph long,” Bailey said. “It also never explains exactly how a merger will have an economic impact. It says it creates jobs, but it doesn’t say how.”

Lack of transparency doesn’t make it convincing, but he told Globe that it’s also difficult to quickly identify “definitely wrong” data.

“I had to spend as much time as they wrote my own competing report,” he joked. “Their 2035 figures may be correct, whether or not a merger takes place, just because health care, higher education, and biomedicine generally grow over time.”

You can contact Alexa Gagosz at alexa.gagosz @ globe.com. Follow her on Twitter @alexagagosz..