Home » Readers Write » Currently Reading:

Readers Write: The Sequester’s Impact on Healthcare: Dangerous Unintended Consequences

July 22, 2013 Readers Write 1 Comment

The Sequester’s Impact on Healthcare: Dangerous Unintended Consequences
By Rich Temple

7-22-2013 8-27-38 PM

It has been three months since the sequester hit the healthcare industry, and the effects are more profound than they might seem. What’s most troubling is that the budget cuts in many cases will wind up costing the government more money and will have a particularly negative impact on cancer patients and those living in rural areas.

Cost of Caring for Unemployed

Across the healthcare spectrum, providers can anticipate about $11 billion in cuts. A joint study by the American Medical Association and the American Hospital Association estimates the loss of 330,127 healthcare jobs and 496,000 indirect job losses by 2021. Victims of job losses tend to require extra care to sustain their health and well-being while out of work, and the cost of these interventions may wipe out the perceived benefits of the sequester’s capricious cost-cutting.

Another Hit for Providers: Cuts in Medicare Reimbursement

For individual healthcare providers, the 2 percent across-the-board Medicare reimbursement cut will exacerbate challenges for providers who are already struggling to adapt to value-based purchasing and other mandated reimbursement cuts. Mercifully, Medicaid was exempted from this cut, but even Medicare Meaningful Use incentives will sustain the 2 percent reduction.

Particularly hard-hit will be rural hospitals, which according to a study by iVantage Health Analytics are twice as likely to be thrown into the red as a result of these cuts. That’s because rural hospitals treat older, poorer, and less-insured patients and are thus directly dependent on Medicare for their economic sustainability. This financial damage will ripple down to the communities they serve since these organizations tend to be among the largest employers and are likely to be a key focal point of much of the activity in their local economies.

Cuts Disproportionately Affect Community-Based Cancer Clinics

Cancer care is the area most profoundly impacted by the sequester. Reimbursement cuts are making it financially untenable for community-based cancer clinics — one of the more cost-effective treatment sites — to continue to serve many patients, thereby forcing them to either seek care in a more expensive hospital setting or not seek care at all.

Historically, Medicare reimbursement for cancer drugs has been the average price of the drugs, plus a 6 percent administrative fee to cover the cost of providing care. The sequester reduces that fee to 4.3 percent for both drugs and services, which in essence translates to a 28 percent cut in actual reimbursement.

According to a study conducted by the actuarial firm Milliman, the sequester is already resulting in layoffs, closings, cutbacks, and is driving patients into hospital settings. The study also says that the government could pay an average of $6,500 more per year for cancer patients in a hospital versus a community clinic.

Cuts to Cancer Research Means Fewer Clinical Trials

Another area where cancer patients are hard hit involves cuts to research funding. Besides the estimated loss of 20,500 research jobs, NIH research indicates that every $1 invested in cancer research yields over $2 in incremental economic activity. This translates to a $3 billion direct negative hit on overall economic activity.

Significant cuts to cancer research mean that fewer clinical trials will be available to help identify better treatments and thus, more protracted, costly, and painful care for patients will continue.

Most Vulnerable are Hardest Hit

In summary, the sequester’s effects are causing great pain on many levels to some of the most vulnerable segments of our population. And the perceived cost-reduction benefits are actually not likely to be realized since the unintended consequences of the sequester look like they will cost even more than the mandated cuts. These consequences could take the form of:

  • More expensive, less efficient care due to patients losing access to primary care physicians
  • Incremental unemployment insurance for those who have lost their jobs
  • Protracted inpatient stays due to less readily available preventative research
  • Other forms of public assistance these individuals will require

The effects of the sequester on healthcare have not been discussed extensively of late in the media. However, it should be noted that there are unintended consequences that we will most likely pay for in the coming years ahead.

Rich Temple is national practice director for IT strategy at
Beacon Partners.

View/Print Text Only View/Print Text Only

HIStalk Featured Sponsors


Currently there is "1 comment" on this Article:

  1. I am not sure there were unintended consequences as much as consequences. Sure, when Gov’t spending / funding / subsidizing decreases, there are consequences. there are also consequences to congress and the Pres not striking a deal – this is laid at the foot of the Pres, IMO. He calculated the risk and chose to hold the American People hostage. There are also unintended consequences to debt out the wazoo. See Detroit, as a pre-curser to where we are headed as a country with debt and deficits running fast and wild.

Subscribe to Updates



Text Ads

Report News and Rumors

No title

Anonymous online form
Rumor line: 801.HIT.NEWS



Founding Sponsors


Platinum Sponsors

































































Gold Sponsors
















Reader Comments

  • Vaporware?: U of Illinois truly got the super-realistic platinum version of the Cerner demo - it's called being a customer. They've ...
  • Douglas Herr: Regarding VA Software: The most interesting part of this is the conflict of interest with Leidos leading the Epic MASS p...
  • Vaporware?: Providers prefer MHS Genesis to AHLTA, the absolute worst EMR ever. And yet, AHLTA is still more interoperable... be...
  • Recovering CIO: Per Politico: "The White House has appointed an acting VA information chief who repeatedly clashed with career staff ...
  • El Jeffe: Snarky response to UnitedHealth Group financial results. Why is it that UHG's success is correlated in any way to af...
  • Michelle Hager: I can tell you that my small company is always in partnership - we have a reputation to maintain. I understand many comp...
  • Hunter Hamrick: There's a lot of truth in what you write...although (as a consultant) I like to hope that not all consulting firms are t...
  • Mitchell Ryan: I think I speak for a lot of us when I say Houston loves our freestanding emergency clinic. We have wait times at hospit...
  • Frank Poggio: And...make sure you have clear targets and objectives, and if they try to tell you you need to expand one or more..be ca...
  • PCP: Just a minor note on Vince's slides: Rycan doesn't "run" clients' business offices for them, or provide services; it's a...

RSS Industry Events

  • An error has occurred, which probably means the feed is down. Try again later.

Sponsor Quick Links