The Ebay of Medicine

The bidding-for-services model is fatally flawed because it fails to have a mechanism for value, meaning the quality that one is getting for the price (think of Consumer Reports).  Therefore, its market is minimal to those who don’t have insurance, Medicare, or Medicaid, and don’t have much money.  People who pay for their own health care by choice are usually affluent and the rest are on private insurance, Medicare or Medicaid. Nor is the volume per registrant high.  One provider reports getting an average of two new, cash-paying patients per month. (Boodman, 2014)

My prediction is the bidding-for-services model will excel primarily with minimum-risk out-patient procedures that are commoditized.  Major illnesses and serious procedures are quality-focused for nearly every patient.  The for-profit and private Tennessee-based company that sponsors the Medibid Auctions notes that of the 6,000 registered providers, most are attempting to recruit foreign cash-paying patients.  Moreover, the quality risk is elevated by the fact that many, if not most, providers in Medibid are retail surgery centers with less public health reporting requirements (e.g., infection rates, etc.) than hospitals. (Boodman, 2014) 

Medibid is a race to the bottom of health care.  Patients are at higher risk because of lower quality care.  Payers are the second biggest losers because they may well be responsible for all the follow-on consequential complications of a low-quality low-cost procedure opted for by the patient.

Works Cited

Boodman, S. G. (2014, August 5). Medical auction website gives power to the patients to choose the lowest bidding surgeon. MedCity News: Health IT, pp. http://medcitynews.com/2014/08/medical-auction-website-gives-power-patients-choose-lowest-bidding-surgeon/.