More broadly, FPLs provide a unique opportunity to study how providers alter care in response to financial incentives, and how this ultimately affects patient outcomes.
FPLs offer a particularly compelling test of providers' behavioral responses for several reasons.
Note, Figure 2 excludes the highest income uninsured patients that are unlikely to be covered by FPLs, but a version of the figure including all uninsured patients is virtually identical.
These results suggest a substantial portion of uninsured patients are paying more than they would under FPLs, but the MEPS can also help us quantify the importance of the laws by forming a rough estimate of how much payments from uninsured patients would fall.
Although the FPLs we study are broadly similar, there are several generalizable differences.
There is reason to believe that these provisions may alter how hospitals respond to FPLs. Tying a FPL to the PPS used by public payers means the payment cap is determined by the diagnosis, and additional treatment will not generate marginal revenue.
As expected, we observe reductions in care with all types of FPLs. However, the additional provisions do not produce stronger responses.