Providence Antitrust Action
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
For more information, please contact:
Athena Maris
athena@lloydmaris.com
503.236.3486
Oregonians Agree with Local Imaging Centers: Choice and Access in Healthcare Decisions Should Not Be Denied by Providence, A Davis, Hibbitts and Midghall Poll Indicates
Portland, OR - June 8, 2005 In a recent statewide survey conducted by Davis, Hibbitts and Midghall, Inc. (DHM), Oregonians voiced strong opinions on the importance of choice and the undue influence Providence Health Systems exerts in Oregonian's health care decisions. These issues are at the heart of an antitrust lawsuit brought by EPIC Imaging and Body Imaging Radiology in Federal court against Providence Health Systems of Oregon after Providence terminated them without cause from Providence-controlled insurance panels and redirected imaging services to their own facilities.
In the survey of 500 Oregonians, individuals were asked, "Should Providence Health Systems be able to limit your doctor's access to the imaging facility of his or her choice?" Two-thirds (68%) said that Providence should not be able to limit a doctor's access to the imaging facility of his or her choice, compared to 17% who said yes and 15% who were unsure.
But the most telling result came from respondents when asked, "Currently Providence Health Systems has the power to tell patients with more than 100 non-Providence insurance plans like Cigna and Aetna where they can and can't go for diagnostic imaging services unless they are willing to pay out-of-pocket charges. Do you think this gives Providence Health Systems too much influence over patients?" A whopping 64% said yes, 20% chose no, leaving 16% unsure. The 64% was consistent among all demographic groups.
Because Providence currently rents its provider panels to over 100 independent insurance companies including such major players as Cigna and Aetna, the termination means that well-insured Oregonians who don't even have Providence insurance can only go to Providence owned imaging facilities unless they are wealthy enough to pay heavy out-of-network charges. Furthermore, area physicians who feel they need the state-of-the-art diagnostic imaging tools and expert radiology services at EPIC and Body Imaging Radiology will be denied access to the centers.
While Providence contends they have "the right to contract with whomever they choose," Oregonians seem to think they have a few rights of their own and question the extent of Providence's influence.
Respondents were asked by DHM, "How important is it for you to have choice in your healthcare decisions?" 97% said important (88% very, 9% somewhat), only 3% said not important (2% not very, 1% not at all), and there were no unsures or non-responders .
Davis, Hibbitts concludes, "The survey findings indicate Oregonians' strong opinions about and preference for choice, with all respondents responding and nearly all saying it is very or somewhat important to them. Their preference for choice was also apparent when nearly two-thirds said PHS's power to tell patients where they can go for imaging services gave PHS too much influence over patients."
"The survey results match what we are hearing in our centers," said Dr. Gerald Warnock, Medical Director of EPIC Imaging. "People are unhappy with Providence for taking away their choice. Physicians are unhappy because they want access to the best tools for the best diagnosis."
Dr. Paul Meunier, Medical Director of Body Imaging Radiology, went on to say, "Providence is not an HMO like Kaiser. They market choice to consumers. If they are planning on being a closed system, they should be honest enough to say it. Otherwise why not compete fairly with those of us who have served this community for decades?"
A hearing to decide whether or not to grant a preliminary injunction preventing the termination while the lawsuit is being decided is scheduled for June 20 th . "Win or lose at the hearing," said Dr. Warnock, "we will continue to fight for free and fair competition in medicine and the right of Oregonians and their doctors to decide for themselves what is in their best medical interest."
-end-
Return to Providence Antitrust Action
