Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 13 de 13
Filter
1.
Am Heart J ; 267: 44-51, 2024 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37871783

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has surpassed surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) as the predominant mode of valve replacement for the treatment of severe aortic stenosis (AS). However, the long-term need for valvular reintervention after TAVR remains unknown. METHODS: Using data from the Medicare Fee for Service 100% dataset, all patients receiving TAVR between July 2011 and December 2020 were identified. Patients were categorized as receiving a valve reintervention (either surgical or transcatheter) or not using the appropriate International Classification of Diseases 10th Revision Procedure Coding System (ICD-10-PCS). A competing risk regression model was used to estimate the cumulative probability of valve reintervention. RESULTS: Of 230,644 TAVR patients were identified, of whom 1,880 received a reintervention. Patients receiving a reintervention were younger and more likely to be male. At 10 years, the crude rate of reintervention was 0.59% within a surviving cohort of 341 patients. After adjusting for the competing risk of death and other covariates, the adjusted cumulative incidence of reintervention at 10 years after TAVR was 1.63%. When the rate of reinterventions was compared between early (2011-2016) and later (2017-2020) time periods, the risk-adjusted rate of reintervention at 4 years had decreased over time (0.85% vs 0.51%). CONCLUSION: The 10-year risk of valve reintervention after TAVR is low and appears to be decreasing over time. Further research is necessary to determine the driving factors contributing to valve reintervention in the current era.


Subject(s)
Aortic Valve Stenosis , Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation , Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement , Humans , Male , Aged , United States/epidemiology , Female , Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement/adverse effects , Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement/methods , Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation/methods , Aortic Valve Stenosis/surgery , Treatment Outcome , Medicare , Aortic Valve/surgery , Risk Factors
2.
Catheter Cardiovasc Interv ; 93(6): 1132-1136, 2019 05 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30549428

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To explore the impact of post-procedure delirium on resource utilization following transcatheter and surgical aortic valve replacement (TAVR and SAVR, respectively). BACKGROUND: Postprocedure delirium is associated with worse long-term survival after TAVR and SAVR. However, its effect on resource utilization has been understudied. METHODS: Using the 2015 Medicare Provider Analysis and Review File (MedPAR), we retrospectively analyzed elderly (≥80 years) Medicare beneficiaries receiving either SAVR or endovascular TAVR in the United States. Multivariate regression models estimating hospitalization cost and length of stay (LoS) were adjusted for patient demographics, comorbidities, and nondelirium complications. RESULTS: A total of 21,088 discharges were available for analysis (12,114 TAVR and 8,974 SAVR). TAVR patients were older (87 ± 3.8 vs. 84 ± 2.7 years; P < 0.001) with a higher comorbidity burden (Charlson index 3.0 ± 1.8 vs. 2.1 ± 1.7; P < 0.0001). Despite this, fewer TAVR patients (1.6%) experienced postoperative delirium during the index hospitalization compared to surgical patients (3.6%; P < 0.0001). Delirium was associated with a 4.16 [3.51-4.81] day longer hospital LoS and $15,592 ($12,849-$18,334) higher incremental hospitalization cost. When stratified by treatment approach, the adjusted incremental cost of delirium was +$13,862 ($9,431-$18,292) with TAVR and +$16,656 ($13,177-$20,136) with SAVR with an additional hospital LoS of +3.39 (2.34-4.43) days and +4.63 (3.81-5.45) days for TAVR and SAVR, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Postprocedure delirium is associated with significantly increased hospitalization costs and LoS following AVR. TAVR was associated with a lower postoperative delirium rate compared to SAVR. Post-TAVR delirium may be associated with less resource consumption than post-SAVR delirium.


Subject(s)
Aortic Valve Stenosis/economics , Aortic Valve Stenosis/surgery , Aortic Valve/surgery , Delirium/economics , Delirium/therapy , Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation/adverse effects , Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation/economics , Hospital Costs , Length of Stay/economics , Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement/adverse effects , Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement/economics , Aged, 80 and over , Databases, Factual , Delirium/diagnosis , Delirium/etiology , Female , Humans , Male , Medicare/economics , Retrospective Studies , Time Factors , Treatment Outcome , United States
3.
J Med Econ ; 27(1): 697-707, 2024.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38654415

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To analyze the cost-effectiveness of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) using the SAPIEN 3 (Edwards Lifesciences, Irvine, CA) compared to surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in low- and intermediate-risk patients from a Japanese public healthcare payer perspective. METHODS: A Markov model cost-effectiveness analysis was developed. Clinical and utility data were extracted from a systematic literature review. Cost inputs were obtained from analysis of the Medical Data Vision claims database and supplemented with a targeted literature search. The robustness of the results was assessed using sensitivity analyses. Scenario analyses were performed to determine the impact of lower mean age (77.5 years) and the effect of two different long-term mortality hazard ratios (TAVI versus SAVR: 0.9-1.09) on both risk-level populations. This analysis was conducted according to the guidelines for cost-effectiveness evaluation in Japan from Core 2 Health. RESULTS: In intermediate-risk patients, TAVI was a dominant procedure (TAVI had lower cost and higher effectiveness). In low-risk patients, the incremental cost effectiveness ratio (ICER) for TAVI was ¥750,417/quality-adjusted-life-years (QALY), which was below the cost-effectiveness threshold of ¥5 million/QALY. The ICER for TAVI was robust to all tested sensitivity and scenario analyses. CONCLUSIONS: TAVI was dominant and cost-effective compared to SAVR in intermediate- and low-risk patients, respectively. These results suggest that TAVI can provide meaningful value to Japanese patients relative to SAVR, at a reasonable incremental cost for patients at low surgical risk and potentially resulting in cost-savings in patients at intermediate surgical risk.


Aortic Stenosis (AS) is the most common valvular heart disease in Japan, and, if left untreated, severe symptomatic AS (sSAS) is associated with a dramatic increase in mortality and morbidity. Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation (TAVI) is a minimally invasive treatment option for replacing the aortic valve in patients with sSAS and has been associated with similar or better outcomes compared to Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement (SAVR), which involves open-heart surgical replacement of the aortic valve. The objective of this study was to compare the costs and health outcomes associated with TAVI compared to SAVR in Japanese patients deemed low- or intermediate-risk for surgery. Despite the expanding use of TAVI in Japan, a cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) does not exist that evaluates the economics of TAVI with the current generation SAPIEN 3 implant in patients with low- and intermediate-risk from a public perspective. Our study suggests that TAVI represents strong value for money among low- and intermediate-risk patients in Japan: compared to SAVR, TAVI is associated with better clinical outcomes and quality of life for patients, at a reasonable additional cost for low-risk patients and at a lower cost for intermediate-risk patients.


Subject(s)
Aortic Valve Stenosis , Quality-Adjusted Life Years , Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Female , Humans , Male , Age Factors , Aortic Valve Stenosis/surgery , Aortic Valve Stenosis/economics , Cost-Effectiveness Analysis , Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation/economics , Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation/methods , Japan , Markov Chains , Models, Econometric , Risk Assessment , Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement/economics , Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement/methods
4.
J Am Heart Assoc ; 13(2): e030569, 2024 Jan 16.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38216519

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: To explore how differences in local socioeconomic deprivation impact access to aortic valve procedures and the treatment of aortic valve disease, in comparison to other open and minimally invasive surgical procedures. METHODS AND RESULTS: Procedure volume data were obtained from the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project from 18 states from 2016 to 2019 and merged with area deprivation index data, an index of zip code-level socioeconomic distress. We estimate the relationship between local deprivation ranking and differences in volumes of aortic valve replacement, which include transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) and surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR), versus coronary artery bypass graft surgery and laparoscopic colectomy (LC). All regressions control for state and year fixed effects and an array of zip code-level characteristics. TAVR procedures have increased over time across all zip codes. The rate of increase is negatively correlated with deprivation ranking, regardless of the higher share of hospitalizations per population in high deprivation areas. Distributional analysis further supports these findings, showing that lower area deprivation index areas account for a disproportionately large share of SAVR, TAVR, and LC procedures in our sample relative to their share of all hospitalizations in our sample. By comparison, the cumulative distribution of coronary artery bypass graft procedures was nearly identical to that of total hospitalizations, suggesting that this procedure is equitably distributed. Regressions show high area deprivation index areas have lower prevalence of SAVR (ß=-15.1%, [95% CI, -26.8 to -3.5]), TAVR (ß=-9.1%, [95% CI, -18.0 to -0.2]), and LC (ß=-19.9%, [95% CI, -35.4 to -4.4]), with no statistical difference in the prevalence of coronary artery bypass graft (ß=-2.5%, [95% CI, -12.7 to 7.6]), a widespread and commonly performed procedure. In the population aged ≥80 years, results show high area deprivation index areas have a lower prevalence of TAVR (ß=-11.9%, [95% CI, -18.7 to -5.2]) but not SAVR (ß=-0.8%, [95% CI, 8.1 to 6.3]), LC (ß=-3.5%, [95% CI, -13.4 to -6.4]), or coronary artery bypass graft (ß=5.2%, [95% CI, -1.1 to 1.1]). CONCLUSIONS: People living in high deprivation areas have less access to life-saving technologies, such as SAVR, and even moreso to device-intensive minimally invasive procedures such as TAVR and LC.


Subject(s)
Aortic Valve Stenosis , Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation , Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement , Humans , Aortic Valve/surgery , Aortic Valve Stenosis/epidemiology , Aortic Valve Stenosis/surgery , Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation/adverse effects , Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation/methods , Treatment Outcome , Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement/adverse effects , Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement/methods , Risk Factors
5.
J Am Heart Assoc ; : e031461, 2024 Aug 27.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-39189613

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The treatment of severe aortic stenosis has evolved considerably since the introduction of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR), yet trends in complications for patients undergoing TAVR or surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) at a national level have yet to be evaluated. METHODS AND RESULTS: We performed a retrospective cohort study using Medicare data to evaluate temporal trends in complications among beneficiaries, aged ≥65 years, treated with elective isolated transfemoral TAVR or SAVR between 2012 and 2019. The study end point was the occurrence of a major complication (composite outcome) during index and up to 30 days after. Multivariable logistic regression was used to assess odds of complications for TAVR and SAVR, individually over time, and for TAVR versus SAVR, over time. The cohort included 211 212 patients (mean±SD age, 78.6±7.3 years; 45.0% women). Complication rates during index following elective isolated aortic valve replacement decreased from 49% in 2012 to 22% in 2019. These reductions were more pronounced for TAVR (41% to >19%, Δ=22%) than SAVR (51% to >47%, Δ=4%). After risk adjustment, the risk of any complication with TAVR was 47% (P<0.0001) lower compared with SAVR in 2012, and 78% (P<0.0001) lower in 2019. TAVR was independently associated with reduced odds of complications each year compared with 2012, with the magnitude of benefit increasing over time (2013 versus 2012: odds ratio [OR], 0.89 [95% CI, 0.81-0.97]; 2019 versus 2012: OR, 0.35 [95% CI, 0.33-0.38]). These findings are consistent for complications up to 30 days from index. CONCLUSIONS: Between 2012 and 2019, the risk of complications after aortic valve replacement among Medicare beneficiaries decreased significantly, with larger absolute and relative changes among patients treated with TAVR than SAVR.

6.
JACC Adv ; 3(8): 101116, 2024 Aug.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-39108421

ABSTRACT

Background: Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is an important treatment option for patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis. It is important to identify predictors of excellent outcomes (good clinical outcomes, more time spent at home) after TAVR that are potentially amenable to improvement. Objectives: The purpose of the study was to use machine learning to identify potentially modifiable predictors of clinically relevant patient-centered outcomes after TAVR. Methods: We used data from 8,332 TAVR cases (January 2016-December 2021) from 21 hospitals to train random forest models with 57 patient characteristics (demographics, comorbidities, surgical risk score, lab values, health status scores) and care process parameters to predict the end point, a composite of parameters that designated an excellent outcome and included no major complications (in-hospital or at 30 days), post-TAVR length of stay of 1 day or less, discharge to home, no readmission, and alive at 30 days. We used recursive feature elimination with cross-validation and Shapley Additive Explanation feature importance to identify parameters with the highest predictive values. Results: The final random forest model retained 29 predictors (15 patient characteristics and 14 care process components); the area under the curve, sensitivity, and specificity were 0.77, 0.67, and 0.73, respectively. Four potentially modifiable predictors with relatively high Shapley Additive Explanation values were identified: type of anesthesia, direct movement to stepdown unit post-TAVR, time between catheterization and TAVR, and preprocedural length of stay. Conclusions: This study identified four potentially modifiable predictors of excellent outcome after TAVR, suggesting that machine learning combined with hospital-level data can inform modifiable components of care, which could support better delivery of care for patients undergoing TAVR.

7.
J Med Econ ; 25(1): 1051-1060, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35983718

ABSTRACT

AIMS: We evaluated the availability of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) to determine its value across all severe symptomatic aortic stenosis (SSAS) patients, especially those untreated because of concerns regarding invasive surgical AVR (SAVR) and its impact on active aging. METHODS: We performed payer perspective cost-utility analysis (CUA) and societal perspective cost-benefit analysis (CBA). The CBA's benefit measure is active time: salaried labor, unpaid work, and active leisure. The study population is a cohort of US elderly SSAS patients. We compared a "TAVR available" scenario in which SSAS patients distribute themselves across TAVR, SAVR, and medical management (MM); and a "TAVR not available" scenario with only SAVR and MM. We structured each scenario with a decision-tree model of SSAS patient treatment allocation. We measured the association between health and active time in the US Health and Retirement Study and used this association to impute active time to SSAS patients given their health. RESULTS: The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and rate of return (RoR) of TAVR availability were $8,533 and 395%, respectively. CUA net monetary benefits (NMB) were $212,199 per patient and $43.4 billion population-wide. CBA NMB were $50,530 per patient and $10.3 billion population-wide. LIMITATIONS: Among study limitations were scarcity of evidence regarding key parameters and the lack of long-term survival, health utility, and treatment cost data. Our analysis did not account for TAVR durability, retreatments, and valve-in-valve treatments. CONCLUSION: Across risk-, age-, and treatment-eligibility groups, TAVR is the economically optimal treatment choice. It represents strong value-for-money per patient and population-wide. The vast majority of TAVR value involves raising treatment uptake among the untreated.


Aortic stenosis (AS) is a common and lethal heart disease. Surgical treatment has long been available, but its invasiveness limits uptake. More recently, transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has emerged as a treatment alternative. Its minimal invasiveness has significantly increased treatment rates, but economic evaluations omit this benefit, risking undervaluation. We evaluated TAVR in elderly US severe symptomatic AS patients, using payer perspective cost-utility analysis (CUA) and societal perspective cost-benefit analysis (CBA). Both CUA and CBA incorporated TAVR's impact on treatment rates. Given patient preferences for treatment options promoting active aging, our CBA used the value of active time as a benefit measure. We found that CUA/CBA net monetary benefits are $212,199/$50,530 per patient. Across risk-, age-, and treatment-eligibility groups, TAVR is the economically optimal treatment choice over surgery and medical management. It represents strong value-for-money per patient and population-wide. Increased treatment uptake accounts for the vast share of TAVR's value.


Subject(s)
Aortic Valve Stenosis , Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation , Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement , Aged , Aortic Valve/surgery , Aortic Valve Stenosis/surgery , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Health Care Costs , Humans , Risk Factors , Treatment Outcome
8.
J Am Heart Assoc ; 11(9): e024377, 2022 05 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35470691

ABSTRACT

Background The aim of this study was to identify patients vulnerable for anxiety and/or depression following aortic valve replacement (AVR) and to evaluate factors that may mitigate this risk. Methods and Results This is a retrospective cohort study conducted using a claims database; 18 990 patients (1/2013-12/2018) ≥55 years of age with 6 months of pre-AVR data were identified. Anxiety and/or depression risk was compared at 3 months, 6 months, and 1 year following transcatheter aortic valve replacement or surgical AVR (SAVR) after risk adjustment using logistic regression and Cox proportional hazards models. Separate models were estimated for patients with and without surgical complications and discharge location. Patients with SAVR experienced a higher relative risk of anxiety and/or depression at 3 months (12.4% versus 8.8%; adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 1.39 [95% CI, 1.19-1.63]) and 6 months (15.6% versus 13.0%; adjusted HR, 1.24 [95% CI, 1.08-1.42]), with this difference narrowing by 12 months (20.1% versus 19.3%; adjusted HR, 1.14 [95% CI, 1.01-1.29]) after AVR. This association was most pronounced among patients discharged to home, with patients with SAVR having a higher relative risk of anxiety and/or depression. In patients who experienced operative complications, there was no difference between SAVR and transcatheter aortic valve replacement. However, among patients without operative complications, patients with SAVR had an increased risk of postoperative anxiety and/or depression at 3 months (adjusted HR, 1.47 [95% CI, 1.23-1.75]) and 6 months (adjusted HR 1.26 [95% CI, 1.08-1.46]), but not at 12 months. Conclusions There is an associated reduction in the risk of new-onset anxiety and/or depression among patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (versus SAVR), particularly in the first 3 and 6 months following treatment.


Subject(s)
Aortic Valve Stenosis , Aortic Valve , Anxiety/epidemiology , Anxiety/etiology , Aortic Valve/surgery , Aortic Valve Stenosis/surgery , Depression/epidemiology , Depression/etiology , Humans , Infant , Retrospective Studies , Risk Factors , Treatment Outcome
9.
Am J Manag Care ; 26(2): e50-e56, 2020 02 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32059100

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To project the social value of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) for inoperable patients with severe, symptomatic aortic stenosis (SSAS). STUDY DESIGN: This study used an economic model with parameters obtained from the literature and from US Census Bureau population projections. METHODS: Our model estimated the economic value that will accrue to inoperable patients with SSAS and to device manufacturers as a result of TAVR utilization. We estimated individual patient value as the monetized gain in quality-adjusted life-years as estimated in the cost-effectiveness literature, net of device costs and cost offsets. We estimated manufacturer value by applying an assumed profit margin to revenue from device sales. We created population-level estimates by combining these individual-level estimates with age-stratified Census Bureau population projections and estimates of the incidence of AS. We assessed model uncertainty through the use of probabilistic sensitivity analyses. RESULTS: Between 2018 and 2028, approximately 465,000 inoperable Americans with SSAS will be treated with TAVR. These procedures will yield a cumulative social benefit of up to $48 billion, with roughly 80% of that benefit accruing to patients and 20% accruing to device manufacturers. CONCLUSIONS: Policy makers and payers should take this social value into account when considering decisions related to the care of inoperable patients with SSAS.


Subject(s)
Aortic Valve Stenosis/surgery , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Models, Economic , Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement/economics , Humans , Quality-Adjusted Life Years , Social Values
10.
J Med Econ ; 22(10): 1022-1024, 2019 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31161830

ABSTRACT

Background: Procedural efficiencies can contribute to cost reductions in transcatheter aortic valve replacement procedures (TAVR). The objective of this study is to determine operating room (OR) variable cost per minute in endovascular TAVR procedures, in a real-world hospital setting. Methods: Using Premier data from January 2015-June 2016 for patients undergoing a primary endovascular TAVR (primary ICD-9 code of 35.05, ICD-10 code of 02RF37Z, 02RF38Z, 02RF3JZ, or 02RF3KZ) procedure, the OR cost per minute was calculated for each patient by dividing the total hospital OR variable cost by the OR time (minutes). Results: Of the 4,573 patients in the cohort, the average age was 80 years, 77% were admitted electively, and the vast majority were discharged home with (30%) or without (45%) home care. Median OR time for endovascular TAVR procedures was 180 min. The trimmed mean OR cost per minute was $43.59 (SD = $28.68). When stratified by Elixhauser Risk score and Charlson comorbidity index, OR cost per minute increased with higher risk and comorbidity (p < 0.0001 and p < 0.041, respectively). Conclusions: This contemporary estimate of the real-world variable OR cost per minute provides researchers with a critical parameter to refine economic models of TAVR and aid clinical program directors in resource planning according to a priori risk and comorbidity.


Subject(s)
Aortic Valve/surgery , Operating Rooms/economics , Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement/economics , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Female , Hospital Costs/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Male , Retrospective Studies , United States
11.
Ann Epidemiol ; 25(7): 486-91, 2015 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25743435

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: More research is needed on the health effects of marijuana use. Results of previous studies indicate that marijuana could alleviate certain factors of metabolic syndrome, such as obesity. METHODS: Data on 6281 persons from National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey from 2005 to 2012 were used to estimate the effect of marijuana use on cardiometabolic risk factors. The reliability of ordinary least squares (OLS) regression models was tested by replacing marijuana use as the risk factor of interest with alcohol and carbohydrate consumption. Instrumental variable methods were used to account for the potential endogeneity of marijuana use. RESULTS: OLS models show lower fasting insulin, insulin resistance, body mass index, and waist circumference in users compared with nonusers. However, when alcohol and carbohydrate intake substitute for marijuana use in OLS models, similar metabolic benefits are estimated. The Durbin-Wu-Hausman tests provide evidence of endogeneity of marijuana use in OLS models, but instrumental variables models do not yield significant estimates for marijuana use. CONCLUSION: These findings challenge the robustness of OLS estimates of a positive relationship between marijuana use and fasting insulin, insulin resistance, body mass index, and waist circumference.


Subject(s)
Least-Squares Analysis , Marijuana Smoking/epidemiology , Metabolic Syndrome/epidemiology , Research Design , Adult , Age Factors , Alcohol Drinking/epidemiology , Body Mass Index , Cross-Sectional Studies , Dietary Carbohydrates/administration & dosage , Exercise , Female , Humans , Insulin Resistance , Male , Middle Aged , Nutrition Surveys , Obesity/epidemiology , Regression Analysis , Reproducibility of Results , Risk Factors , Sex Factors , Socioeconomic Factors , United States , Waist Circumference
12.
Decis Anal ; 12(3): 122-129, 2015 Sep.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26966422

ABSTRACT

The success of extended warranties and buyer protection plans suggests that insurance against a small loss has high decision utility. We explore whether the behavioral insight that people are highly averse to small chances of loss can be used to create a powerful incentive that has very low expected value. We compare decisions of individuals offered fixed payments for healthy choices to those offered insurance in exchange for healthy choices. We test the prediction that aversion to small losses will result in very high rates of health behavior uptake in exchange for insurance. Three hundred participants endowed with a $2 bonus randomly received one of two incentives for completing a scheduled health risk assessment: (1) an insurance guarantee against the 1% risk of losing the $2 bonus or (2) a fixed payment at the expected value of the insurance. Relative to the fixed payment condition, participants in the insurance intervention were 70% more likely to meet their health risk assessment appointment (p < 0.01). Fixed payments of $2.59 were needed for every $1 spent on insurance to achieve the same behavioral effect. Loss aversion, probability weighting, and the certainty effect may account for this result. Incentive design may benefit from utilizing an insurance paradigm.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL