"You Have to Rob Peter to Pay Paul So Your Kid Can Breathe": Using Qualitative Methods to Characterize Trade-Offs and Economic Impact of Asthma Care Costs.

BACKGROUND: Economic analyses often focus narrowly on individual patients' health care use, while overlooking the growing economic burden of out-of-pocket costs for health care on other family medical and household needs. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to explore intrafamilial trade-offs families make when paying for asthma care. RESEARCH DESIGN: In 2018, we conducted telephone interviews with 59 commercially insured adults who had asthma and/or had a child with asthma. We analyzed data qualitatively via thematic content analysis. PARTICIPANTS: Our purposive sample included participants with high-deductible and no/low-deductible health plans. We recruited participants through a national asthma advocacy organization and a large nonprofit regional health plan. MEASURES: Our semistructured interview guide explored domains related to asthma adherence and cost burden, cost management strategies, and trade-offs. RESULTS: Participants reported that they tried to prioritize paying for asthma care, even at the expense of their family's overall financial well-being. When facing conflicting demands, participants described making trade-offs between asthma care and other health and nonmedical needs based on several criteria: (1) short-term needs versus longer term financial health; (2) needs of children over adults; (3) acuity of the condition; (4) effectiveness of treatment; and (5) availability of lower cost alternatives. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that cost-sharing for asthma care often has negative financial consequences for families that traditional, individually focused economic analyses are unlikely to capture. This work highlights the need for patient-centered research to evaluate the impact of health care costs at the family level, holistically measuring short-term and long-term family financial outcomes that extend beyond health care use alone.

Strategies commercially-insured families use to manage the cost of asthma care: a qualitative interview study.

OBJECTIVE: Families affected by asthma report difficulty adhering to care regimens because of high medication costs, coupled with increased cost sharing required by some insurance plans. To inform efforts to support adherence, we conducted a qualitative study to explore how families manage asthma care costs. METHODS: We conducted phone interviews with commercially-insured, US adults (n = 59) who had asthma and/or a child with asthma. Our purposive sample included participants with high- and low/no-deductible health plans. We analyzed data using thematic content analysis to identify strategies for managing asthma care costs and to assess strategies' implications for adherence. RESULTS: Our analysis identified four overarching strategies for managing asthma care costs. First, participants used prevention strategies to avoid costly acute care by minimizing exposure to asthma triggers and adhering strictly to preventive medication regimens. Second, participants used shopping strategies to reduce costs, including by comparing medication prices across pharmacies, using medication coupons or free samples, and switching to lower-cost medications. Third, budgeting strategies involved putting aside funds, including in tax-exempt health savings accounts, or taking on debt to pay for care. Finally, some participants sought to reduce costs by forgoing recommended care, including by skipping medication doses or replacing prescribed medications with alternative therapies. CONCLUSION: Commercially-insured families use a wide range of strategies to manage asthma care costs, with both positive and negative implications for adherence. Our typology of asthma cost management strategies can inform insurance redesign and other interventions to help families safely reduce costs and maximize adherence to recommended care.