Impact of COVID-19 on work loss in the United States- A retrospective database analysis.

OBJECTIVES: This study investigates the utilization of work absence benefits among United States (US) employees diagnosed with COVID-19, examining frequency, duration, cost, and types of work loss benefits used. METHODS: This retrospective analysis of the Workpartners Research Reference Database (RRDb) included employees eligible for short- and long-term disability (STD and LTD employer-sponsored benefits, respectively), and other paid work absence benefits from 2018 to 2022. Workpartners RRDb includes over 3.5 million employees from over 500 self-insured employers across the US. Employees were identified by codes from adjudicated medical and disability claims for COVID-19 (2020-2022) and influenza, as well as prescription claims for COVID-19 treatments. Associated payments were quantified for each absence reason. RESULTS: Approximately 1 million employees were eligible for employer-sponsored paid leave benefits between January 2018 and December 2022. The mean age was 37 years (22% >50 years), and 49.4% were females. COVID-19 was the 2nd most common reason for an STD claim (6.9% of all STD claims) and 13th for an LTD claim (1.7% of all LTD claims) from 2020-2022. The mean duration for COVID-19 STD claims was 24 days (N = 3,731, mean claim=$3,477) versus 10 days for influenza (N = 283, mean claim=$1,721). The mean duration for an LTD claim for COVID-19 was 153 days (N = 11, mean claim=$19,254). Only 21.5% of employees with STD claims in the COVID-19 cohort had prior COVID-19-associated medical or pharmacy claims; over half (range 53%-61%) had documented high risk factors for severe COVID-19. CONCLUSION: COVID-19 and influenza have the potential to cause work loss in otherwise healthy employees. In this analysis, COVID-19 was the second most frequent reason for an STD claim at the start of the pandemic and remained high (ranked 5th) in 2022. These results highlight the impact of COVID-19 on work loss beyond the acute phase. Comprehensively evaluating work loss implications may help employers prioritize strategies, such as vaccinations and timely treatments, to mitigate the impact of COVID-19 on employees and their companies.

COVID-19 results in short- and long-term symptoms that may affect employees' ability to work. Short- and long-term disability (STD and LTD, respectively), other work absences, and medical and pharmacy claims from the Workpartners Research Reference Database were analyzed for US adult (≥18 years) employees. COVID-19 claims were identified using the Center for Disease Control and Prevention recommended International Classification of Diseases codes during the analysis from 2020 to 2022. During 2020 to 2022, COVID-19 ranked as the second most frequent reason for STD claims and 13th most frequent among LTD claims. Influenza ranked 58th overall with no LTD claims (2018­2022). The average COVID-19 STD claim lasted 24 days and cost employers $3,477 per claim, and LTD claims averaged 153 days, costing $19,254. Only 21.5% of employees with STD claims in the COVID-19 cohort had prior COVID-19-associated medical or pharmacy claims, and over half (range 53%­61%) had a documented high-risk factor for severe COVID-19. Our results highlight the ongoing and substantial impact of COVID-19 on work absence benefit utilization beyond the acute phase. This analysis demonstrates the need for employers and researchers to review all available medical, pharmacy, and disability claims to assess the acute and long-term impact of COVID-19 on employees and prioritize mitigation strategies to reduce the burden of the virus to their employees.

Association Between Weight Reduction and Employees' Healthcare Cost.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study is to assess the impact of ≥15% body mass index (BMI) reduction on employees' health expenditures. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed health risk assessment surveys combined with insurance claims from January 2014 to December 2019. We compared costs of employees with baseline BMI > 30 who reported ≥15% BMI reduction in subsequent health risk assessment reports with employees who lost ≤5% BMI within the same period, matching the two cohorts on demographics and costs. RESULTS: The study cohort of 197 lost an average of 23% of their BMI from baseline. The average age was 44 years with majority females (approximately 80%). Group health insurance payments were similar at baseline; at year 1, the study cohort had a 33% payment reduction compared with 10% reduction in the control group. CONCLUSIONS: A ≥15% BMI reduction was associated with a substantial medical cost savings.

Effect of Carving in Pharmacy Benefits on Utilization and Costs.

BACKGROUND: Rising medical costs are a significant concern for employers offering health benefits to employees, and there is interest in identifying insurance plan designs that optimize the effect of pharmacy benefits on overall costs. For instance, employers must decide between plans that carve in pharmacy benefits (where medical and pharmacy benefits are integrated into 1 package through an insurer) versus plans that carve out pharmacy benefits (where pharmacy benefits are separately administered through a pharmacy benefit manager). Little is known about the effect of carving in pharmacy benefits on medical utilization and costs. OBJECTIVE: To compare the effect of carving in versus carving out pharmacy benefits on medical utilization, medical costs, and health management program participation in commercial health plans. METHODS: We performed a propensity score-matched analysis comparing carve-in and carve-out members of a regional health plan in 2018. Our primary outcomes were medical utilization (annual medical claims/1,000 members) and costs (medical costs per member per month [PMPM]). We categorized these into the following domains: inpatient, emergency department, outpatient/ambulatory surgery, urgent care, primary care, specialist services, and diagnostics (laboratory testing/imaging). We additionally assessed participation in health plan-based health management programs. RESULTS: We analyzed 9,633 carve-in members matched with 9,633 carve-out members. Compared with carving out pharmacy benefits, carving in was associated with 3.7% lower medical costs, with an $8.73 reduction in PMPM ($225.87 vs. $234.60), and no significant difference in medical utilization; significantly lower inpatient and urgent care claims (reduction of 9.29 claims/1,000 and 51.3 claims/1,000, respectively) and costs ($10.08 and $0.12 PMPM reduction, respectively); lower injectable medical therapy costs ($4.32 PMPM reduction); and higher durable medical equipment costs ($2.14 PMPM increase). Carve-in members also experienced 4.9% higher health management program participation. CONCLUSIONS: As employers attempt to understand the value of carving in versus carving out pharmacy benefits to health plans, our findings suggest that carving in pharmacy benefits is associated with reduced medical costs and hospitalizations. Our findings can assist in informing employer decision-making processes and, as a result, reducing costs of care. DISCLOSURES: No outside funding supported this study. Parekh was and Huang and Good are employed by the UPMC Centers for High-Value Health Care and Value-Based Pharmacy Initiatives. Manolis is employed by the UPMC Health Plan within the UPMC Insurance Services Division. Papa, Drnach, and Spiegel are employed by WorkPartners within the UPMC Insurance Services Division.