My understanding is that the $60 ibuprofen was a line item amongst other charges. Everything else you mentioned is likely covered by another line item in their bill. It's not as if they went to the ER and got a bill of $60. They perhaps got a bill of $500, of which the breakdown mentioned $60 for ibuprofen.
It's kind of like going to a mechanic and getting a bill of $200 for a single headlamp bulb, and another $300 for labor. Then the mechanic arguing that the $200 for the bulb includes the mechanic's expertise, knowing which bulb to buy, etc. Umm...no. All that is included in labor costs.
>This seems absolutely reasonable to me, I wish I could charge a 'fill my email with RFPs' type fees.
Do you not think that fee should encompass doctor's expertise, instead of sprinkling that over cost of materials?
My initial reaction when I read the piece was in agreement. I think it makes sense for ERs to have a facility fee. However, it doesn't explain how one hospital's facility fee can be, say, double that of another. Is it that one hospital is using Hue lightbulbs compared to the other?
A $5751 bill which is almost entirely a facility fee is ridiculous.
I would imagine a facility fee should be relatively fixed - it is the cost to maintain the facility and has nothing to do with a given patient's medical condition. As such, it is trivial for a hospital to publicize the fee and provide transparency.
In general, I think all the items they bill for are reasonable. The amounts, though? Not at all. When you start looking at the variation in how much is charged for the same items across different hospitals (or even within), there is no good model that can provide an explanation.