How private equity is ruining healthcare

The healthcare sector has seen an influx of funding from private equity groups over the last several years, aiding in the contraction of the industry. But has the influence of cash been beneficial for healthcare?

During the COVID-19 pandemic, while most healthcare offices closed and Americans were told to put off elective procedures, one private equity-backed dermatology chain based in California stayed open, booking appointments, even for cosmetic procedures such as Botox injections, Bloomberg reported.

The actions were questionable from a public health standpoint, but with Wall Street backers, staying open to maintain revenue and profit led the decision. More than $10 billion has been invest in medical practices from private equity firms over the last five years, according to Bloomberg, with particular focus on dermatology.

Some of these investments have led to cost-cutting measures once firms have a stake and then reselling with a 20% to 30% annualized return. However, this method may not be best for healthcare, which deals with life and death situations, and could conflict directly with public health goals.

See the full story below:

Amy Baxter

Amy joined TriMed Media as a Senior Writer for HealthExec after covering home care for three years. When not writing about all things healthcare, she fulfills her lifelong dream of becoming a pirate by sailing in regattas and enjoying rum. Fun fact: she sailed 333 miles across Lake Michigan in the Chicago Yacht Club "Race to Mackinac."

Around the web

A string of executive orders from the White House created serious concerns among radiologists and other healthcare providers throughout the United States. The American College of Radiology issued a statement to help guide its members through the chaos. 

Bridgefield Capital, founded in 2015, has previously invested in such popular brands as Cirque Du Soleil, Del Monte and Quiksilver. This transaction is expected to be completed in the second half of 2025. 

Given the precarious excitement of the moment—or is it exciting precarity?—policymakers and healthcare leaders must set directives guiding not only what to do with AI but also when to do it.