Project description:ObjectiveTort reform may affect health insurance premiums both by reducing medical malpractice premiums and by reducing the extent of defensive medicine. The objective of this study is to estimate the effects of noneconomic damage caps on the premiums for employer-sponsored health insurance.Data sources/study settingEmployer premium data and plan/establishment characteristics were obtained from the 1999 through 2004 Kaiser/HRET Employer Health Insurance Surveys. Damage caps were obtained and dated based on state annotated codes, statutes, and judicial decisions.Study designFixed effects regression models were run to estimate the effects of the size of inflation-adjusted damage caps on the weighted average single premiums.Data collection/extraction methodsState tort reform laws were identified using Westlaw, LEXIS, and statutory compilations. Legislative repeal and amendment of statutes and court decisions resulting in the overturning or repealing state statutes were also identified using LEXIS.Principal findingsUsing a variety of empirical specifications, there was no statistically significant evidence that noneconomic damage caps exerted any meaningful influence on the cost of employer-sponsored health insurance.ConclusionsThe findings suggest that tort reforms have not translated into insurance savings.
Project description:ObjectiveWe investigate the factors driving the downward trend in employer sponsored health insurance (ESI) coverage between 1999 and 2002 for low- and middle-income workers, and assess their insurance options in the absence of ESI coverage.DataWe use the 1999 and 2002 rounds of the National Survey of America's Families (NSAF), supplemented with ESI premiums from the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey, as well as other state- and county-level data from a variety of sources. The sample includes workers between the ages of 19 and 64.Study designWe first estimate linear probability models of the probability of having an ESI offer and, for those with an offer, the probability of taking up ESI coverage, using two-stage least square regression on the 2002 worker sample. We then use Oaxaca-Blinder regression-based decomposition methods to identify the factors that explain the changes in ESI offer and take-up between 1999 and 2002.Principal findingsWe find that while low-income workers are more likely to be uninsured and are most vulnerable to the loss of ESI coverage, many middle-income workers are also in a precarious position when faced with the loss of ESI coverage. Many low- and middle-income workers have few coverage options in the absence of ESI. This is particularly problematic for low-income workers: only 13 percent have a spouse with an ESI offer and the nongroup premium they face increased at a much higher rate than for middle-income workers. Finally, we find that the drop in ESI offers between 1999 and 2002 was driven largely by changes in nature of the workers' jobs, while the drop in ESI take-up was driven largely by rising ESI premiums.ConclusionsPolicies that shore up the ESI system are important for both low- and middle-income workers, as both are vulnerable to a loss of insurance coverage in the absence of ESI. Over time, the potential coverage options available to low- and middle-income workers in the absence of ESI have narrowed as nongroup premiums have increased. While public coverage has provided some protection from that increase for low-income workers, middle-income workers are much less likely to have access to public protection.
Project description:BackgroundMedicaid expansion and subsidized private plans purchased on the Affordable Care Act's (ACA) Marketplaces accounted for most of the ACA's coverage gains.ObjectiveCompare access to care and financial strain between Medicaid and Marketplace plans, and benchmark these against employer-sponsored insurance (ESI) plans.DesignCross-sectional survey PARTICIPANTS: A nationally representative, non-institutionalized sample of 37,219 non-elderly adults with incomes up to 400% of the federal poverty level between 2015 and 2018, and a sub-group of individuals with chronic diseases.Main measuresSelf-reported barriers to accessing care, cost-related medication non-adherence, and financial strain.Key resultsMarketplace enrollees were more likely than Medicaid enrollees to delay or avoid care due to cost (19.3% vs 10.0%; adjusted difference (AD), 8.6 [95% CI, 6.8 to 10.4]) and report difficulties affording specialty care (7.7% vs 6.6%; AD, 1.8% [95% CI, 0.3% to 3.3%]), while there were no differences in having insurance accepted by a doctor or ability to afford dental care. Marketplace enrollees were also more likely to report cost-related medication non-adherence (21.5% vs 20.0%; AD, 4.0 [CI, 1.5 to 6.4]), be very worried about not being able to pay medical costs in case of a serious accident (32.3% vs 25.8%; AD, 6.4 [CI, 4.2 to 8.6]), have expenses exceeding $2000 (22.4% vs 5.4%; AD, 8.3 [CI, 6.2 to 10.3]), and have problems paying medical bills (18.4% vs 15.6%; AD, 1.8 [CI, 0.3 to 3.9]). Marketplace-Medicaid differences were larger among persons with a chronic disease. Individuals in ESI plans fared better for most, but not all, outcomes.ConclusionMedicaid offers better protections than Marketplace plans on most measures of access and financial strain.
Project description:ImportanceDirect costs of substance use disorders (SUDs) in the United States are incurred primarily among the working-age population. Quantifying the medical cost of SUDs in the employer-sponsored insurance (ESI) population can improve understanding of how SUDs are affecting workplaces and inform decision-making on the value of prevention strategies.ObjectiveTo estimate the annual attributable medical cost of SUDs in the ESI population from the health care payer perspective.Design, setting, and participantsIn this economic evaluation, Merative MarketScan 2018 databases were weighted to represent the non-Medicare eligible ESI population. Regression and mathematical modeling of medical expenditures controlled for insurance enrollee demographic, clinical, and insurance factors to compare enrollees with and without an SUD diagnosis to identify the annual attributable medical cost of SUDs. Data analysis was conducted from January to March 2022.ExposuresInternational Statistical Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision, Clinical Modification SUD diagnoses on inpatient or outpatient medical records according to Clinical Classifications Software categories (alcohol-, cannabis-, hallucinogen-, inhalant-, opioid-, sedative-, stimulant-, and other substance-related disorders).Main outcomes and measuresAnnual SUD medical cost in the ESI population overall and by substance type (eg, alcohol). Number of enrollees with an SUD diagnosis and the annual mean cost per affected enrollee of SUD diagnosis (any and by substance type) are also reported.ResultsAmong 162 million ESI enrollees, 2.3 million (1.4%) had an SUD diagnosis in 2018. The regression analysis sample included 210 225 individuals with an SUD diagnosis (121 357 [57.7%] male individuals; 68 325 [32.5%] aged 25-44 years) and 1 049 539 individuals with no SUD diagnosis. The mean annual medical cost attributable to SUD diagnosis per affected enrollee was $15 640 (95% CI, $15 340-$15 940), and the total annual medical cost in the ESI population was $35.3 billion (2018 USD). Alcohol use disorder ($10.2 billion) and opioid use disorder ($7.3 billion) were the most costly.Conclusions and relevanceIn this economic evaluation of medical expenditures in the ESI population, the per-person and total medical costs of SUDs were substantial. Strategies to support employees and their health insurance dependents to prevent and treat SUDs can be considered in terms of potentially offsetting the existing high medical cost of SUDs. Medical expenditures for SUDs represent the minimum direct cost that employers and health insurers face because not all people with SUDs have a diagnosis, and costs related to absenteeism, presenteeism, job retention, and mortality are not addressed.
Project description:We use health care claims data from the Health Care Cost Institute to estimate the share of geographic variation in health care spending attributable to person-specific (demand) and place-specific (supply) factors. We exploit patient migration across 112 metropolitan areas between 2012 and 2016. Using an event study approach, we find that moving to an area with 10% higher (lower) spending leads to a 4.2% increase (decrease) in individual medical spending. Our estimate implies that 42% of variation in health care spending among the commercially insured is attributable to place-specific factors. We show that variation in both price and utilization jointly determine the place-specific impact on individual spending. All else equal, we find that moving to an area with 10% higher (lower) prices, on average leads to a 5% increase (decrease) in spending, while moving to an area with 10% higher (lower) utilization leads to a 3.6% increase (decrease).
Project description:ObjectiveThe study estimated balance billing for out-of-network behavioral health claims and described subscriber characteristics associated with higher billing.MethodsClaims data (2011-2014) from a national managed behavioral health organization's employer-sponsored insurance (N=196,034 family-years with out-of-network behavioral health claims) were used to calculate inflation-adjusted annual balance billing-the submitted amount (charged by provider) minus the allowed amount (insurer agreed to pay plus patient cost-sharing) and any discounts offered by the provider. Among family-years with complete sociodemographic data (N=68,659), regressions modeled balance billing as a function of plan and provider supply, subscriber and family-year, and employer characteristics. A two-part model accounted for family-years without balance billing.ResultsAmong the 50% of family-years with balance billing, mean±SD balance billing was $861±$3,500 (median, $175; 90th percentile, $1,684). Adjusted analysis found balance billing was higher ($523 higher, 95% confidence interval [CI]=$340, $705) for carve-out versus carve-in plans and for health maintenance organization (HMO) enrollees versus non-HMO enrollees ($156, 95% CI=$75, $237); for subscribers with a bachelor's degree, compared with an associate's degree or with a high school diploma or lower (between $172 [95% CI=$228, $116] and $224 [95% CI=$284, $163] higher, respectively); and for subscribers ages 45-54, compared with those ages 35-44 and 18-24 (between $57 [95% CI=$103, $10] and $290 [95% CI=$398, $183] higher, respectively). Balance billing was lower in states with more in-network providers per capita (-$8, 95% CI=-$10, -$5).ConclusionsBalance billing for out-of-network behavioral health claims may be burdensome. Expanded behavioral health networks may improve access.
Project description:ObjectiveTo estimate the effect of growth in health care costs that outpaces gross domestic product (GDP) growth ("excess" growth in health care costs) on employment, gross output, and value added to GDP of U.S. industries.Study settingWe analyzed data from 38 U.S. industries for the period 1987-2005. All data are publicly available from various government agencies.Study designWe estimated bivariate and multivariate regressions. To develop the regression models, we assumed that rapid growth in health care costs has a larger effect on economic performance for industries where large percentages of workers receive employer-sponsored health insurance (ESI). We used the estimated regression coefficients to simulate economic outcomes under alternative scenarios of health care cost inflation.ResultsFaster growth in health care costs had greater adverse effects on economic outcomes for industries with larger percentages of workers who had ESI. We found that a 10 percent increase in excess growth in health care costs would have resulted in 120,803 fewer jobs, US$28,022 million in lost gross output, and US$14,082 million in lost value added in 2005. These declines represent 0.17 to 0.18 percent of employment, gross output, and value added in 2005.ConclusionExcess growth in health care costs is adversely affecting the economic performance of U.S. industries.
Project description:Although hemophilia has a potentially high economic impact, published estimates of health care costs for Americans with hemophilia are sparse and non-specific as to the non-bleeding complications of the disease. The objective of this study is to estimate average annual health care expenditures for people with hemophilia covered by employer-sponsored insurance, stratified according to the influence of age, type of hemophilia [A (factor VIII deficiency) versus B (factor IX)], presence of neutralizing alloantibody inhibitors and exposure to blood-borne viral infections. Data from the MarketScan Commercial and Medicare Research Databases were used for the period 2002-2008 to identify cases of hemophilia and to estimate mean and median medical expenditures during 2008. A total of 1,164 males with hemophilia were identified with continuous enrollment during 2008, 933 with hemophilia A and 231 with hemophilia B. Mean health care expenditures were $155,136 [median $73,548]. Mean costs for 30 (3%) males with an inhibitor were 5 times higher than for males without an inhibitor, approximately $697,000 [median $330,835] and $144,000 [median $73,321], respectively. Clotting factor concentrate accounted for 70%-82% of total costs. Average costs for 207 adults with HCV or HIV infection were 1.5 times higher than those for adults without infection. Hemophilia treatment is costly, particularly for individuals with neutralizing alloantibody inhibitors who require bypassing agents. Efforts to understand the cause of inhibitors are needed so that prevention strategies can be implemented and the excess costs resulting from this serious complication of hemophilia care can be avoided.
Project description:BackgroundEmployer-sponsored health insurance, particularly for retirees with limited incomes, plays a major funding role in Canadian health care, including prescription drugs and dental services. We aimed to investigate the changes in retiree health insurance availability over time.MethodsWe performed a secondary analysis of data from the 2005 and 2013-2014 cycles of the Canadian Community Health Survey using multivariate logistic regression to study changes in retiree coverage availability over time in Ontario. We estimated the adjusted odds ratios of having employer coverage for likely retirees (people over age 65 yr who reported not working and those over age 75 yr), adjusting for a number of potential confounders. Sensitivity analysis was also performed for coverage of different treatments separately.ResultsThe response rate was 76% for the 2005 cycle and 66% for 2013-2014 for the entire survey. The characteristics of respondents in the 2 survey cycles were similar, except respondents in 2013-2014 were wealthier. In our adjusted model, respondents in 2013-2014 had lower odds of reporting retiree coverage than respondents in 2005 (adjusted odds ratio 0.87; 95% confidence interval 0.77-0.99). This represents an absolute reduction in the probability of receiving retiree coverage of up to 3.4%.InterpretationOur analysis suggests that the rate of retiree health insurance has declined for Canadians with similar characteristics over the past decade. As we know insurance coverage has a strong association with use of treatments such as prescription drugs and dental care, this decline may result in decreased access to treatment and is an issue that warrants further investigation.