Considering the Effects of a Recent US Supreme Court's Ruling on Dialysis Care Costs

Abstract

Dialysis care in the United States is expensive and is mostly paid for by Medicare. To reduce the cost of providing dialysis services, the federal government has relied on a law that designates Medicare as a secondary payer in the first 30 months of dialysis. During this period, private health insurers are the primary payer and pay for the majority of dialysis-related costs. Private health insurers often pay substantially higher prices for dialysis care than does Medicare, possibly due to highly concentrated dialysis-provider markets. A perspective by Boumil and Curfmin in this journal discusses how a recent ruling by the US Supreme Court may limit Medicare's role as a secondary payer, potentially altering the economic relationship between dialysis providers and private insurers. Boumil and Curfmin discuss how these changes may ultimately promote competition in dialysis-provider markets and lower dialysis-related costs paid by private health insurers. We compare this viewpoint to responses and concerns voiced by other stakeholders in the kidney-care community and outline additional ways in which the Supreme Court's ruling may affect competition in dialysis markets and prices paid for dialysis by private insurers.