Sutter Health’s revenues and costs continue to be scrutinized in a federal trial over whether Northern California’s largest hospital system imposed anticompetitive contracts on health insurers, reported Courthouse News.
Sutter executives took the stand Friday to defend Sutter’s practices and their so-called pro-competitive benefits, touting the hospital system’s quality and efficiency.
Sarah Krevans, who recently retired as CEO, said Sutter tried to reduce costs and curb rising prices for inpatient hospital services by consolidating non-patient care services throughout its system; for example, processing payroll and paying vendors from one location rather than at each individual hospital.
By 2011, she said, the hospital system had saved $340 million, making significant progress toward its goal of cutting costs by $700 million.
“We were able to take advantage of modern technology that you wouldn’t be able to do at individual locations,” she said. “That effort alone saved several hundred million dollars.”
She also said Sutter was under tremendous financial pressure as more Californians joined the Medi-Cal rolls after the passage of the Affordable Care Act.
“We serve a disproportionate share of people from disadvantaged backgrounds. Every year we serve more patients who are governmental patients than people who are commercial patients,” she said, referring to Medicare and Medi-Cal, California’s version of the federal Medicaid program that pays a portion of healthcare services for low-income adults and children.
Want more news? Subscribe to CPI’s free daily newsletter for more headlines and updates on antitrust developments around the world.
Featured News
AI at the Center of Google’s Defense Against DOJ Antitrust Charges
Oct 13, 2024 by
CPI
Judge Dismisses Antitrust Lawsuit Against Ivy League Over Athletic Scholarships
Oct 11, 2024 by
CPI
FTC and DOJ Revamp Merger Guidelines to Identify Illegal Transactions More Efficiently
Oct 11, 2024 by
CPI
US Consumer Watchdog Eyes Expansion of ‘Junk Fee’ Crackdown Ahead of 2024 Election
Oct 10, 2024 by
CPI
Brazil Proposes Reform to Competition Law Targeting Big Tech
Oct 10, 2024 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – Refusal to Deal
Sep 27, 2024 by
CPI
Antitrust’s Refusal-to-Deal Doctrine: The Emperor Has No Clothes
Sep 27, 2024 by
Erik Hovenkamp
Why All Antitrust Claims are Refusal to Deal Claims and What that Means for Policy
Sep 27, 2024 by
Ramsi Woodcock
The Aspen Misadventure
Sep 27, 2024 by
Roger Blair & Holly P. Stidham
Refusal to Deal in Antitrust Law: Evolving Jurisprudence and Business Justifications in the Align Technology Case
Sep 27, 2024 by
Timothy Hsieh