Accounting for the burden and redistribution of health care costs: Who uses care and who pays for it.

OBJECTIVE: To measure the burden of financing health care costs and quantify redistribution among population groups. DATA SOURCES: A synthetic population using data combined from multiple sources, including the Survey of Income and Program Participation (SIPP), Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS), Kaiser Family Foundation (KFF)/Health Research Educational Trust (HRET) Employer Health Benefits Survey, American Community Survey (ACS), and National Health Expenditure Accounts (NHEA). STUDY DESIGN: We estimate two dollar amounts for each individual in the synthetic population: (a) payments to finance health care services, which includes all payments by a household and their employers to finance health care, including premiums, out-of-pocket payments, federal and state taxes, and other payments; and (b) the dollar value of health care services received, which equals the amount paid to providers for those services. DATA EXTRACTION METHODS: We linked the nationally representative survey data using statistical matching. We allocated health care expenditures from the NHEA to individuals and households based on expenditures reported in the MEPS. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: We show that higher-income households pay the most to finance health care in dollar amounts, but the burden of payments as a share of income is greater among lower-income households. CONCLUSIONS: Accounting for all sources of payments provides a clear picture of the burden of financing health care costs, and how that burden is spread under our current financing system.

Building a National Culture of Health: Background, Action Framework, Measures, and Next Steps.

Because health is a function of more than medical care, solutions to U.S. health problems must encompass more than reforms to health care systems. But those working to improve health, well-being, and equity still too often find themselves traveling on parallel paths that rarely intersect. In 2013, the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (RWJF) embarked on a pioneering effort to advance a Culture of Health initiative. A Culture of Health places well-being at the center of every aspect of life, with the goal of enabling everyone in our diverse society to lead healthier lives, now and for generations to come. To put this vision into action, RWJF worked with RAND to develop an action framework that identifies how the nation will work toward achieving these outcomes. This article provides background on the development of this action framework. The Culture of Health action framework is designed around four action areas and one outcome area. Action areas are the core areas in which investment and activity are needed: (1) making health a shared value; (2) fostering cross-sector collaboration to improve well-being; (3) creating healthier, more equitable communities; and (4) strengthening integration of health services and systems. Each action area contains a set of drivers indicating where the United States needs to accelerate change and a set of measures illustrating places for progress. Within the primary Culture of Health outcome---improved population health, well-being, and equity---the authors identified three outcome areas: enhanced individual and community well-being, managed chronic disease and reduced toxic stress, and reduced health care costs.

Preparedness of Americans for the Affordable Care Act.

This paper investigates whether individuals are sufficiently informed to make reasonable choices in the health insurance exchanges established by the Affordable Care Act (ACA). We document knowledge of health reform, health insurance literacy, and expected changes in healthcare using a nationally representative survey of the US population in the 5 wk before the introduction of the exchanges, with special attention to subgroups most likely to be affected by the ACA. Results suggest that a substantial share of the population is unprepared to navigate the new exchanges. One-half of the respondents did not know about the exchanges, and 42% could not correctly describe a deductible. Those earning 100-250% of federal poverty level (FPL) correctly answered, on average, 4 out of 11 questions about health reform and 4.6 out of 7 questions about health insurance. This compares with 6.1 and 5.9 correct answers, respectively, for those in the top income category (400% of FPL or more). Even after controlling for potential confounders, a low-income person is 31% less likely to score above the median on ACA knowledge questions, and 54% less likely to score above the median on health insurance knowledge than a person in the top income category. Uninsured respondents scored lower on health insurance knowledge, but their knowledge of ACA is similar to the overall population. We propose that simplified options, decision aids, and health insurance product design to address the limited understanding of health insurance contracts will be crucial for ACA's success.