No Surprises Act arbitration rule changes reshape provider-insurer disputes

References

1. 1.Adler, L., Ginsburg, P. B., & Trish, E. (2023). The No Surprises Act's dispute resolution process: Early implementation challenges. Health Affairs, 42(8), 1123-1131. https://doi.org/10.1377/hlthaff.2023.00456
2. 2.Bannow, T. (2024, May 11). Provider, insurer groups rush to shape No Surprises Act arbitration rules. STAT News. https://www.statnews.com/2026/05/11/no-surprises-act-new-rules-dispute-resolution/
3. 3.Cooper, Z., Morton, F. S., & Shekita, N. (2023). Surprise billing legislation and provider market power. Journal of Health Economics, 89, 102745. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhealeco.2023.102745
4. 4.Dafny, L., & Lee, T. H. (2024). Alternative dispute resolution in healthcare: Trends and future directions. Health Management Science, 27(3), 445-462. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10729-024-09678-x
5. 5.Fuse Brown, E. C., & King, J. S. (2024). Two years of the No Surprises Act: Implementation challenges and market responses. New England Journal of Medicine, 390(12), 1089-1095. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMhpr2315678
6. 6.Garmon, C., & Chartock, B. (2024). Administrative burden in healthcare dispute resolution: Evidence from arbitration processes. Health Services Research, 59(4), 1234-1248. https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-6773.14234
7. 7.Mehrotra, A., & Chernew, M. E. (2024). Regulatory uncertainty in healthcare payment reform: Lessons from surprise billing legislation. Health Affairs, 43(3), 456-464. https://doi.org/10.1377/hlthaff.2024.00123
8. 8.Richman, B. D., & Schulman, K. A. (2023). The evolution of surprise billing regulation: Market dynamics and policy implications. Journal of the American Medical Association, 330(18), 1745-1752. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2023.18945
9. 9.Trish, E., & Herring, B. (2024). Stakeholder engagement in healthcare regulation: Evidence from No Surprises Act implementation. Health Economics, 33(7), 1456-1471. https://doi.org/10.1002/hec.4789
10. 10.Zhu, J. M., & Polsky, D. (2023). Claim bundling in medical dispute resolution: Efficiency versus equity considerations. Medical Care Research and Review, 80(6), 678-689. https://doi.org/10.1177/10775587231189456