Consistency of Physician Data Across Health Insurer Directories.

This study assesses the consistency of information across publicly available physician directories from 5 large national health insurers.

Cooperation amongst insurers on enhancing quality of care: precondition or substitute for competition?

In health care systems based upon managed competition, insurers are expected to negotiate with providers about price and quality of care. The Dutch experience, however, shows that quality plays a limited role in insurer-provider negotiations. It has been suggested that this is partly due to a lack of cooperation among insurers. This raises the question whether cooperation amongst insurers is a precondition or a substitute for quality-based competition. To answer this question, we mapped insurers' cooperating activities to enhance quality of care using a six-stage continuum. The first three stages (defining, designing and measuring quality indicators) may enhance competition, whereas the next three stages (setting benchmarks, steering patients and selective contracting) may reduce it. We investigated which types of insurer cooperation currently take place in the Netherlands. Additionally, we organized focus groups among insurers, providers and other stakeholders to examine their perceptions on insurer cooperation. We find that all stakeholders see advantages of cooperation amongst insurers in the first stages of the continuum and sometimes cooperate in this domain. Cooperation in the next stages is almost absent and more controversial because without adequate quality information, it is difficult to assess whether the benefits outweigh the cost associated with reduced competition.

Japanese insurers' attitudes toward adverse selection and genetic discrimination: a questionnaire survey and interviews with employees about using genetic test results.

Since the 1990s, insurance has been the primary field focused on the social disadvantages of using genetic test results because of the concerns related to adverse selection. Although life insurance is popular in Japan, Japan does not currently have any regulations on the use of genetic information and insurers have largely kept silent for decades. To reveal insurers' attitudes on the topic, we conducted an anonymous questionnaire survey with 100 insurance company employees and recruited nine interviewees from the survey respondents. We found that genetic discrimination is not generally considered as a topic of human rights. We also found that insurers have uncertain fears and concerns about adverse selection in terms of actuarial fairness but not regarding profits. When it comes to preparing guidelines on the use of genetic information by Japanese insurers, we believe that public dialog and consultation are necessary to gain understanding of the people.

Incorporating self-reported health measures in risk equalization through constrained regression.

Most health insurance markets with premium-rate restrictions include a risk equalization system to compensate insurers for predictable variation in spending. Recent research has shown, however, that even the most sophisticated risk equalization systems tend to undercompensate (overcompensate) groups of people with poor (good) self-reported health, confronting insurers with incentives for risk selection. Self-reported health measures are generally considered infeasible for use as an explicit 'risk adjuster' in risk equalization models. This study examines an alternative way to exploit this information, namely through 'constrained regression' (CR). To do so, we use administrative data (N = 17 m) and health survey information (N = 380 k) from the Netherlands. We estimate five CR models and compare these models with the actual Dutch risk equalization model of 2016 which was estimated by ordinary least squares (OLS). In the CR models, the estimated coefficients are restricted, such that the under-/overcompensation for groups based on self-reported general health is reduced by 20, 40, 60, 80, or 100%. Our results show that CR can improve outcomes for groups that are not explicitly flagged by risk adjuster variables, but worsens outcomes for groups that are explicitly flagged by risk adjuster variables. Using a new standardized metric that summarizes under-/overcompensation for both types of groups, we find that the lighter constraints can lead to better outcomes than OLS.

Use of Imaging During Staging and Surveillance of Localized Colon Cancer in a Large Insured Population.

BACKGROUND: Adherence to surveillance guidelines in resected colon cancer has significant implications for patient morbidity, cost of care, and healthcare utilization. This study measured the underuse and overuse of imaging for staging and surveillance in stage I-II colon cancer. METHODS: The OptumLabs database was queried for administrative claims data on adult patients with stage I-II colon cancer who underwent surgery alone in 2008 through 2016. Use of PET and CT imaging was evaluated during both initial staging (n=6,921) and surveillance for patients with at least 1 year of follow-up (n=5,466). "High use" was defined as >2 CT abdominal/pelvic (CT A/P) or PET scans per year during surveillance. RESULTS: Overall, 27% of patients with stage I-II colon cancer did not have a staging CT A/P or PET scan and 95% did not have a CT chest scan. However, rates of staging CT A/P and CT chest scans increased from 62.0% (2008) to 74.8% (2016) and from 2.3% (2008) to 7.1% (2016), respectively. Staging PET use was overall very low (5.2%). During surveillance, approximately 30% of patients received a CT A/P or PET and 5% received a CT chest scan within the first year after surgery. Of patients who had surveillance CT A/P or PET scans, the proportion receiving >2 scans within the first year (high use) declined from 32.4% (2008) to 9.6% (2016) (P = .01). CONCLUSIONS: Although PET use remains appropriately low, many patients with stage I-II colon cancer do not receive appropriate staging and surveillance CT chest scans. Among those who do receive these scans during surveillance, high use has declined significantly over time.

Advice from the health insurer as a channelling strategy: a natural experiment at a Dutch health insurance company.

BACKGROUND: In a health care system based on managed competition it is important that health insurers are able to channel their enrolees to preferred care providers. However, enrolees are often very negative about financial incentives and any limitations in their choice of care provider. Therefore, a Dutch health insurance company conducted an experiment to study the effectiveness of a new method of channelling their enrolees. This method entails giving enrolees advise on which physiotherapists to choose when they call customer service. Offering this advice as an extra service is supposed to improve service quality ratings. Objective of this study is to evaluate this channelling method on effectiveness and the impact on service quality ratings. METHODS: In this experiment, one of the health insurer's customer service call teams (pilot team) began advising enrolees on their choice of physiotherapist. Three data sources were used. Firstly, all enrolees who called customer service received an online questionnaire in order to measure their evaluation of the quality of service. Enrolees who were offered advice received a slightly different questionnaire which, in addition, asked about whether they intended to follow the advice they were offered. Multilevel regression analysis was conducted to analyse the difference in service quality ratings between the pilot team and two comparable customer service teams before and after the implementation of the channelling method. Secondly, employees logged each call, registering, if they offered advice, whether the enrolee accepted it, and if so, which care provider was advised. Thirdly, data from the insurance claims were used to see if enrolees visited the recommended physiotherapist. RESULTS: The results of the questionnaire show that enrolees responded favorably to being offered advice on the choice of physiotherapist. Furthermore, 45% of enrolees who received advice and then went on to visit a care provider, followed the advice. The service quality ratings were higher compared to control groups. However, it could not be determined whether this effect was entirely due to the intervention. CONCLUSIONS: Channelling enrolees towards preferred care providers by offering advice on their choice of care provider when they call customer service is successful. The effect on service quality seems positive, although a causal relationship could not be determined.

Feedback preferences of patients, professionals and health insurers in integrated head and neck cancer care.

BACKGROUND: Audit and feedback on professional practice and health care outcomes are the most often used interventions to change behaviour of professionals and improve quality of health care. However, limited information is available regarding preferred feedback for patients, professionals and health insurers. OBJECTIVE: Investigate the (differences in) preferences of receiving feedback between stakeholders, using the Dutch Head and Neck Audit as an example. METHODS: A total of 37 patients, medical specialists, allied health professionals and health insurers were interviewed using semi-structured interviews. Questions focussed on: "Why," "On what aspects" and "How" do you prefer to receive feedback on professional practice and health care outcomes? RESULTS: All stakeholders mentioned that feedback can improve health care by creating awareness, enabling self-reflection and reflection on peers or colleagues, and by benchmarking to others. Patients prefer feedback on the actual professional practice that matches the health care received, whereas medical specialists and health insurers are interested mainly in health care outcomes. All stakeholders largely prefer a bar graph. Patients prefer a pie chart for patient-reported outcomes and experiences, while Kaplan-Meier survival curves are preferred by medical specialists. Feedback should be simple with firstly an overview, and 1-4 times a year sent by e-mail. Finally, patients and health professionals are cautious with regard to transparency of audit data. CONCLUSIONS: This exploratory study shows how feedback preferences differ between stakeholders. Therefore, tailored reports are recommended. Using this information, effects of audit and feedback can be improved by adapting the feedback format and contents to the preferences of stakeholders.

Association Between Health Plan Exit From Medicaid Managed Care and Quality of Care, 2006-2014.

Importance: State Medicaid programs have increasingly contracted with insurers to provide medical care services for enrollees (Medicaid managed care plans). Insurers that provide these plans can exit Medicaid programs each year, with unclear effects on quality of care and health care experiences. Objective: To determine the frequency and interstate variation of health plan exit from Medicaid managed care and evaluate the relationship between health plan exit and market-level quality. Design, Setting, and Participants: Retrospective cohort of all comprehensive Medicaid managed care plans (N = 390) during the interval 2006-2014. Exposures: Plan exit, defined as the withdrawal of a managed care plan from a state's Medicaid program. Main Outcomes and Measures: Eight measures from the Healthcare Effectiveness Data and Information Set were used to construct 3 composite indicators of quality (preventive care, chronic disease care management, and maternity care). Four measures from the Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems were combined into a composite indicator of patient experience, reflecting the proportion of beneficiaries rating experiences as 8 or above on a 0-to-10-point scale. Outcome data were available for 248 plans (68% of plans operating prior to 2014, representing 78% of beneficiaries). Results: Of the 366 comprehensive Medicaid managed care plans operating prior to 2014, 106 exited Medicaid. These exiting plans enrolled 4 848 310 Medicaid beneficiaries, with a mean of 606 039 beneficiaries affected by plan exits annually. Six states had a mean of greater than 10% of Medicaid managed care recipients enrolled in plans that exited, whereas 10 states experienced no plan exits. Plans that exited from a state's Medicaid market performed significantly worse prior to exiting than those that remained in terms of preventive care (57.5% vs 60.4%; difference, 2.9% [95% CI, 0.3% to 5.5%]), maternity care (69.7% vs 73.6%; difference, 3.8% [95% CI, 1.7% to 6.0%]), and patient experience (73.5% vs 74.8%; difference, 1.3% [95% CI, 0.6% to 1.9%]). There was no significant difference between exiting and nonexiting plans for the quality of chronic disease care management (76.2% vs 77.1%; difference, 1.0% [95% CI, -2.1% to 4.0%]). There was also no significant change in overall market performance before and after the exit of a plan: 0.7-percentage point improvement in preventive care quality (95% CI, -4.9 to 6.3); 0.2-percentage point improvement in chronic disease care management quality (95% CI, -5.8 to 6.2); 0.7-percentage point decrease in maternity care quality (95% CI, -6.4 to 5.0]); and a 0.6-percentage point improvement in patient experience ratings (95% CI, -3.9 to 5.1). Medicaid beneficiaries enrolled in exiting plans had access to coverage for a higher-quality plan, with 78% of plans in the same county having higher quality for preventive care, 71.1% for chronic disease management, 65.5% for maternity care, and 80.8% for patient experience. Conclusions and Relevance: Between 2006 and 2014, health plan exit from the US Medicaid program was frequent. Plans that exited generally had lower quality ratings than those that remained, and the exits were not associated with significant overall changes in quality or patient experience in the plans in the Medicaid market.

How can the regulator show evidence of (no) risk selection in health insurance markets? Conceptual framework and empirical evidence.

If consumers have a choice of health plan, risk selection is often a serious problem (e.g., as in Germany, Israel, the Netherlands, the United States of America, and Switzerland). Risk selection may threaten the quality of care for chronically ill people, and may reduce the affordability and efficiency of healthcare. Therefore, an important question is: how can the regulator show evidence of (no) risk selection? Although this seems easy, showing such evidence is not straightforward. The novelty of this paper is two-fold. First, we provide a conceptual framework for showing evidence of risk selection in competitive health insurance markets. It is not easy to disentangle risk selection and the insurers' efficiency. We suggest two methods to measure risk selection that are not biased by the insurers' efficiency. Because these measures underestimate the true risk selection, we also provide a list of signals of selection that can be measured and that, in particular in combination, can show evidence of risk selection. It is impossible to show the absence of risk selection. Second, we empirically measure risk selection among the switchers, taking into account the insurers' efficiency. Based on 2-year administrative data on healthcare expenses and risk characteristics of nearly all individuals with basic health insurance in the Netherlands (N > 16 million) we find significant risk selection for most health insurers. This is the first publication of hard empirical evidence of risk selection in the Dutch health insurance market.

Accidentes de trabajo y enfermedades laborales en los sistemas de compensación laboral / Work accidents and occupational diseases in work compensation systems

Introducción: Las contingencias laborales constituyen un importante problema de salud pública en el mundo. Para reducir los daños, los países han introducido leyes y normas técnicas para la prevención de las mismas y reparación de las víctimas a través de seguros de compensación laboral y atención médica integral. Objetivo: Conocer el nivel de evidencia existente sobre los accidentes de trabajo y enfermedades profesionales compensados y las características de los trabajadores que los presentaron e industrias más afectadas. Métodos: Se realizó una revisión sistemática bajo la metodología "Prisma". La búsqueda bibliográfica se llevó a cabo en bases de datos y revistas científicas a través de palabras claves que fueron combinadas y restringidas a artículos publicados entre los años 2003 y 2013. Resultados: Se incluyeron 11 artículos de investigaciones que fueron realizadas en cuatro continentes: Europa, Asia, Oceanía y América. Los tipos de estudios fueron, principalmente, retrospectivos con fuentes secundarias. Las muestras variaron entre 307 hasta 1.320.792 registros en diferentes grupos poblacionales, que tuvieron una o múltiples reclamaciones de compensación por accidentes de trabajo y/o enfermedades laborales. El género masculino tuvo el porcentaje más alto de reclamaciones; las industrias más afectadas fueron la manufactura y la construcción; predominaron como primera causa los esguinces o torceduras, seguidos por los trastornos musculoesqueléticos. Conclusiones: Las investigaciones revisadas proporcionan informaciones para caracterizar las contingencias ocupacionales y orientar las estrategias de prevención en las industrias y en las poblaciones trabajadoras más afectadas. Sin embargo, tienen limitaciones para establecer la gravedad de las lesiones y los tipos de compensación otorgados.

Introduction: Occupational injuries constitute an important problem of public health in the world. In order to reduce damage, countries have introduced laws and technical standards for their prevention, and to provide the victims support by means of worker's compensation insurance and comprehensive health care. Objective: To know the existing evidence level of work accidents and compensated occupational diseases and the characteristics of workers who presented them, and the most affected branches of industries. Methods: A systematic review following the "Prisma" methodology was conducted. The bibliographic research was carried out in databases and scientific journals through keywords that were combined and restricted to articles published between 2003 and 2013. Results: Eleven articles about researches conducted in four continents (Europe, Asia, Oceania and America) were included. The studies were mainly retrospective with secondary sources, and the samples ranged from 307 to 1,320,792 records in different population groups, who had one or multiple claims of compensation for work-related accidents or illnesses. The male gender had the highest percentage of claims; the most affected industries were manufacture and construction; the first causes were sprains and strains followed by musculoskeletal disorders. Conclusions: The reviewed investigations provide information to characterize the occupational contingencies and to orient the strategies of prevention in the industries and in the most affected working population. However, there are limitations to establish the seriousness of the injuries and the types of compensation awarded.

La reforma del baremo: un reto y un esfuerzo para las aseguradoras / Reform of the scale: a challenge and an effort to Insurers

No disponible

Relationships between Medicare Advantage contract characteristics and quality-of-care ratings: an observational analysis of Medicare Advantage star ratings.

BACKGROUND: The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) publishes star ratings on Medicare Advantage (MA) contracts to measure plan quality of care with implications for reimbursement and bonuses. OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether MA contract characteristics are associated with quality of care through the Medicare plan star ratings. DESIGN: Retrospective study of MA star ratings in 2010. Unadjusted and adjusted multivariable linear regression models assessed the relationship between 5-star rating summary scores and plan characteristics. SETTING: CMS MA contracts nationally. PARTICIPANTS: 409 (71%) of a total of 575 MA contracts, covering 10.56 million Medicare beneficiaries (90% of the MA population) in the United States in 2010. MEASUREMENTS: The MA quality ratings summary score (stars range from 1 to 5) is a quality measure based on 36 indicators related to processes of care, health outcomes, access to care, and beneficiary satisfaction. RESULTS: Nonprofit, larger, and older MA contracts were more likely to receive higher star ratings. Star ratings ranged from 2 to 5. Nonprofit contracts received an average 0.55 (95% CI, 0.42 to 0.67) higher star ratings than for-profit contracts (P  < 0.001) after controls were set for contract characteristics. LIMITATION: The study focused on persons aged 65 years or older covered by MA. CONCLUSION: In 2010, nonprofit MA contracts received significantly higher star ratings than for-profit contracts. When comparing health plans in the future, the CMS should give increasing attention to for-profit plans with lower quality ratings and consider developing programs to assist newer and smaller plans in improving their care for Medicare beneficiaries. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: None.

Dental care plan assessment using the CAHPS Dental Plan Survey.

OBJECTIVES: The performance of a recently developed survey instrument that inquires about patients' experiences with the receipt of dental care was examined to evaluate its potential utility as a patient-reported outcome measure for dental care plans. METHODS: Individuals with dental insurance (n = 1,216) were surveyed using the Consumer Assessment of Health Care Providers and Systems (CAHPS) Dental Plan Survey. The instrument's pre-established composite and rating scores were compared across dental insurance carriers (6 most common and all others combined) using ANOVA. In addition, each score was analyzed separately using multivariate regression with respondent and plan characteristics as independent variables. RESULTS: There was significant differentiation among dental insurance carriers for three of the six scores (dental care composite, access to care composite, and dentist rating). Several respondent characteristics were associated with higher scores, including age, race, income level, and oral health self-rating. Having a choice of dental plans, and years with one's dental plan were associated with higher dental plan ratings, while having to find a new dentist to use the plan tended to lower all scores except the cost and services composite. CONCLUSIONS: The results reported here reflect differences among dental insurance carriers, rather than among the many different dental plans offered by those carriers. Nevertheless, the CAHPS instrument scores reflected differences among patients' experiences (composite scores) and ratings (rating scores) across carriers, suggesting both that the instrument should be a useful tool for assessing patient-reported outcomes, and that comparisons of these outcomes should control for respondent characteristics as well as specific plan characteristics.