Changes in Healthcare Spending Attributable to High Deductible Health Plan Offer Among Enrollees with Comorbid Substance Use Disorder and Cardiovascular Disease.

BACKGROUND: The rise in prevalence of high deductible health plans (HDHPs) in the United States may raise concerns for high-need, high-utilization populations such as those with comorbid chronic conditions. In this study, we examine changes in total and out-of-pocket (OOP) spending attributable to HDHPs for enrollees with comorbid substance use disorder (SUD) and cardiovascular disease (CVD). METHODS: We used de-identified administrative claims data from 2007 to 2017. SUD and CVD were defined using algorithms of ICD 9 and 10 codes and HEDIS guidelines. The main outcome measures of interest were spending measure for all non-SUD/CVD-related services, SUD-specific services, and CVD-specific services, for all services and medications specifically. We assessed both total and OOP spending. We used an intent-to-treat two-part model approach to model spending and computed the marginal effect of HDHP offer as both the dollar change and percent change in spending attributable to HDHP offer. RESULTS: Our sample included 33,684 enrollee-years and was predominantly white and male with a mean age of 53 years. The sample had high demonstrated substantial healthcare utilization with 94% using any non-SUD/CVD services, and 84% and 78% using SUD and CVD services, respectively. HDHP offer was associated with a 17.0% (95% CI = [0.07, 0.27] increase in OOP spending for all non-SUD/CVD services, a 21.1% (95% CI = [0.11, 0.31]) increase in OOP spending for all SUD-specific services, and a 13.1% (95% CI = [0.04, 0.23]) increase in OOP spending for all CVD-specific services. HDHP offer was also associated with a significant increase in OOP spending on non-SUD/CVD-specific medications and SUD-specific medications, but not CVD-specific medications. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that while HDHPs do not change overall levels of annual spending among enrollees with comorbid CVD and SUD, they may increase the financial burden of healthcare services by raising OOP costs, which could negatively impact this high-need and high-utilization population.

Trends and postoperative outcomes of thyroidectomy after expansion and rise of health insurance deductibles in the fiscal year.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study is to evaluate a relationship between expansion of High Deductible Health Plans (HDHPs) and the number of thyroid surgery cases with associated postoperative outcomes in the fiscal year. METHODS: Data from TriNetX was used to evaluate the trends in thyroid surgery from 2005 and 2021 between the end of the year (Quarter 4) and the beginning of the year (Quarter 1). Risk of postoperative outcomes were statistically interrogated. RESULTS: The average rate of thyroid surgery in cases/year between Quarter 4 and Quarter 1 was similar after expansion of HDHPs (152; 146; p = 0.64). There was no increased risk of postoperative complications. The rate of surgery decreased significantly for patients with Medicare after implementation of the revised American Thyroid Association (ATA) guidelines (Quarter 4: p = 0.03; Quarter 1: p = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Patients are less likely to delay thyroid surgery at the end of the year despite higher deductibles.

The December Effect in Pediatric Elective Surgery Utilization: Differences Between Privately and Publicly Insured Children.

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to identify differences in December elective surgery utilization between privately and publicly insured children, given that increases in the prevalence and size of annual deductibles may be driving more families with commercial health insurance to delay elective pediatric surgical procedures until later in the calendar year. STUDY DESIGN: We identified patients aged <18 years who underwent myringotomy, tonsillectomy ± adenoidectomy, tympanoplasty, hydrocelectomy, orchidopexy, distal hypospadias repair, or repair of inguinal, umbilical, or epigastric hernia using the 2012-2019 state inpatient and ambulatory surgery and services databases of 9 states. Log-binomial regression models were used to compare relative probabilities of procedures being performed each month. Linear regression models were used to evaluate temporal trends in the proportions of procedures performed in December. RESULTS: Our study cohort (n = 1 001 728) consisted of 56.7% privately insured and 41.8% publicly insured children. Peak procedure utilization among privately and publicly insured children was in December (10.1%) and June (9.6%), respectively. Privately insured children were 24% (95% CI 22%-26%) more likely to undergo surgery in December (P < .001), with a significant increase seen for 8 of 9 procedures. There was no trend over time in the percentage of procedures performed in December, except for hydrocelectomies, which increased by 0.4 percentage points/year among privately insured children (P = .02). CONCLUSIONS: Privately insured children are >20% more likely than publicly insured children to undergo elective surgery in December. However, despite increases in the prevalence of high deductibles, the proportion of procedures performed in December has not increased over recent years.

Alleviating Financial Hardships Associated with High-Deductible Health Plans for Adults with Chronic Conditions Through Health Savings Accounts.

BACKGROUND: High-deductible health plans (HDHPs) are becoming increasingly common, but their financial implications for enrollees with and without chronic conditions and the mitigating effects of health savings accounts (HSAs) are relatively unknown. OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to compare financial hardship between non-HDHPs and HDHPs with and without HSAs, stratified by enrollees' number of chronic conditions. DESIGN: We used data from 2015 to 2018 Medical Expenditure Panels Surveys (MEPS) to compare rates of financial hardship across individuals with HDHPs and non-HDHPs using linear and logistic regression models. PARTICIPANTS: A nationally representative sample of 30,981 adults aged 18-64 enrolled in HDHPs and non-HDHPs. MAIN MEASURES: We examined several measures of financial hardship, including total yearly out-of-pocket medical spending as well as rates of delaying medical care or prescriptions in the past year due to cost, forgoing medical care or prescriptions in the past year due to cost, paying medical bills over time, or having problems paying medical bills. We compared rates using the non-HDHP as the control. KEY RESULTS: On most measures, HDHPs are associated with greater financial hardship compared to non-HDHPs, including average annual out-of-pocket spending of $637 for non-HDHPs, $939 for HDHPs with HSAs, and $825 for HDHPs without HSAs (p < 0.01). However, for HDHP enrollees with multiple chronic conditions, having an HSA was associated with less financial hardship (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that HSAs may be most beneficial for those with chronic conditions, in part due to the tax benefits they offer as well as the fact that those with chronic conditions are more likely to take advantage of their HSAs than their younger, healthier counterparts. However, as HDHPs are more likely to be correlated with worse financial outcomes regardless of health status, recent trends of increasing participation may be a reason for concern.

Impact of High Deductible Health Plans on Continuous Buprenorphine Treatment for Opioid Use Disorder.

BACKGROUND: Long-term, continuous treatment with medication like buprenorphine is the gold standard for opioid use disorder (OUD). As high deductible health plans (HDHPs) become more prevalent in the commercial insurance market, they may pose financial barriers to people with OUD. OBJECTIVE: To estimate the impact of HDHPs on continuity of buprenorphine treatment, concurrent visits for counseling/psychotherapy and OUD-related evaluation and management, and out-of-pocket spending. DESIGN: Difference-in-differences analysis comparing trends in outcomes among enrollees whose employers offer an HDHP (treatment group) to enrollees whose employers never offer an HDHP (comparison group). PARTICIPANTS: Enrollees with OUD from a national sample of commercial health insurance plans during 2007-2017 who initiate buprenorphine treatment. MAIN MEASURES: Number of days of continuous buprenorphine treatment; probabilities of continuous buprenorphine treatment ≥30, ≥90, ≥180, and ≥365 days; probability of concurrent (i.e., within the same month) behavioral therapy (i.e., counseling or psychotherapy); probability of concurrent OUD-related evaluation and management visits; proportions of buprenorphine treatment episodes with counseling/psychotherapy and evaluation and management visits; and out-of-pocket (OOP) spending on buprenorphine, behavioral therapy, and evaluation and management visits. KEY RESULTS: HDHPs were associated with an average increase of $98 (95% CI: $48, $150) on OOP spending on buprenorphine per treatment episode but no change in the number of days of continuous buprenorphine treatment or concurrent use of related services. CONCLUSIONS: HDHPs do not reduce continuity of buprenorphine treatment among commercially insured enrollees with OUD but may increase financial burden for this population.

Impact of High Deductible Health Plans on Diabetes Care Quality and Outcomes: Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVE: To provide a review of the impact of high deductible health plans (HDHPs) on the utilizations of services required for optimal management of diabetes and subsequent health outcomes. METHODS: Systematic literature review of studies published between January 1, 2000, and May 7, 2021, was conducted that examined the impact of HDHP on diabetes monitoring (eg, recommended laboratory and surveillance testing), routine care (eg, ambulatory appointments), medication management (eg, medication initiation, adherence), and acute health care utilization (eg, emergency department visits, hospitalizations, incident complications). RESULTS: Of the 303 reviewed articles, 8 were relevant. These studies demonstrated that HDHPs lower spending at the expense of reduced high-value diabetes monitoring, routine care, and medication adherence, potentially contributing to the observed increases in acute health care utilization. Additionally, patient out-of-pocket costs for recommended screenings doubled, and total health care expenditures increased by 49.4% for HDHP enrollees compared with enrollees in traditional health plans. Reductions in disease monitoring and routine care and increases in acute health care utilization were greatest in lower-income patients. None of the studies examined the impact of HDHPs on access to diabetes self-management education, technology use, or glycemic control. CONCLUSION: Although HDHPs reduce some health care utilization and costs, they appear to do so at the expense of limiting high-value care and medication adherence. Policymakers, providers, and payers should be more cognizant of the potential for negative consequences of HDHPs on patients' health.

Moral hazard and selection for voluntary deductibles.

This paper investigates whether the voluntary deductible in the Dutch health insurance system reduces moral hazard or acts only as a cost reduction tool for low-risk individuals. We use a sample of 14,089 observations, comprising 2,939 individuals over seven waves from the Longitudinal Internet Studies for the Social sciences panel for the analysis. We employ bivariate models that jointly model the choice of a deductible and health care utilization and supplement the identification with an instrumental variable strategy. The results show that the voluntary deductible reduces moral hazard, especially in the decision to visit a doctor (extensive margin) compared with the number of visits (intensive margin). In addition, a robustness test shows that selection on moral hazard is not present in this context.

High-Deductible Health Plans and Prevention.

High-deductible health plans (HDHPs) are becoming more popular owing to their potential to curb rising health care costs. Relative to traditional health insurance plans, HDHPs involve higher out-of-pocket costs for consumers, which have been associated with lower utilization of health services. We focus specifically on the impact that HDHPs have on the use of preventive services. We critique the current evidence by discussing the benefits and drawbacks of the research designs used to examine this relationship. We also summarize the findings from the most methodologically sophisticated studies. We conclude that the balance of the evidence shows that HDHPs are reducing the use of some preventive service, especially screenings. However, it is not clear if HDHPs affect all preventive services. Additional research is needed to determine why variability in conclusions exists among studies. We describe an agenda for future research that can further inform public health decision makers on the impact of HDHPs on prevention.

Total and out-of-pocket costs of different primary management strategies in ovarian cancer.

BACKGROUND: Communicating healthcare costs to patients is an important component of delivering high-quality value-based care, yet cost data are lacking. This is especially relevant for ovarian cancer, where no clinical consensus on optimal first-line treatment exists. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to generate cost estimates of different primary management strategies in ovarian cancer. STUDY DESIGN: All women who underwent treatment for ovarian cancer from 2006-2015 were identified from the MarketScan database (n=12,761) in this observational cohort study. Total and out-of-pocket costs were calculated with the use of all claims within 8 months from initial treatment and normalized to 2017 US dollars. The generalized linear model method was used to assess cost by strategy. RESULTS: Among patients who underwent neoadjuvant chemotherapy and those who underwent primary debulking, mean adjusted total costs were $113,660 and $107,153 (P<.001) and mean out-of-pocket costs were $2519 and $2977 (P<.001), respectively. Total costs for patients who had intravenous standard, intravenous dose-dense, and intraperitoneal/intravenous chemotherapy were $105,047, $115,099, and $121,761 (P<.001); and out-of-pocket costs were $2838, $3405, and $2888 (P<.001), respectively. Total costs for regimens that included bevacizumab were higher than those without it ($171,468 vs $104,482; P<.001); out-of-pocket costs were $3127 vs $2898 (P<.001). Among patients who did not receive bevacizumab, 25% paid ≥$3875, and 10% paid ≥$6265. For patients who received bevacizumab, 25% paid ≥$4480, and 10% paid ≥$6635. Among patients enrolled in high-deductible health plans, median out-of-pocket costs were $4196, with 25% paying ≥$6680 and 10% paying ≥$9751. CONCLUSION: Costs vary across different treatment strategies, and patients bear a significant out-of-pocket burden, especially those enrolled in high-deductible health plans.

Cancer History, Health Insurance Coverage, and Cost-Related Medication Nonadherence and Medication Cost-Coping Strategies in the United States.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the relationship between cancer history and cost-related medication nonadherence (CRN) as well as cost-coping strategies, by health insurance coverage. METHODS: We used the 2013 to 2016 National Health Interview Survey to identify adults aged 18 to 64 years with (n = 3599) and without (n = 56 909) a cancer history. Cost-related changes in medication use included (1) CRN, measured as skipping, taking less, or delaying medication because of cost, and (2) cost-coping strategies, measured as requesting lower cost medication or using alternative therapies to save money. Separate multivariable logistic regressions were used to calculate the adjusted odds ratios (AORs) of CRN and cost-coping strategies associated with cancer history, stratified by insurance. RESULTS: Cancer survivors were more likely than adults without a cancer history to report CRN (AOR 1.26; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.10-1.43) and cost-coping strategies (AOR 1.10; 95% CI 0.99-1.19). Among the privately insured, the difference in CRN by cancer history was the greatest among those enrolled in high-deductible health plans (HDHPs) without health savings accounts (HSAs) (AOR 1.78; 95% CI 1.30-2.44). Among adults with HDHP and HSA, cancer survivors were less likely to report cost-coping strategies (AOR 0.62; 95% CI 0.42-0.90). Regardless of cancer history, CRN and cost-coping strategies were the highest for those uninsured, enrolled in HDHP without HSA, and without prescription drug coverage under their health plan (all P<.001). CONCLUSIONS: Cancer survivors are prone to CRN and more likely to use cost-coping strategies. Expanding options for health insurance coverage, use of HSAs for those with HDHP, and enhanced prescription drug coverage may effectively address CRN.

Total and out-of-pocket expenditures among women with metastatic breast cancer in low-deductible versus high-deductible health plans.

PURPOSE: High-deductible health plan (HDHP) enrollment is expanding rapidly and might substantially increase out-of-pocket (OOP) payment burden. We examined trends in total and OOP health service expenditures overall and by insurance coverage type among women with metastatic breast cancer. METHODS: We used a longitudinal time series design to examine measures among 5364 women with metastatic breast cancer insured by a large US health insurer from 2004 to 2011. We measured outcomes during the 12 months after a first identified metastatic breast cancer diagnosis and required women to have at least 6 months of prior enrollment. We plotted enrollment measures and adjusted total and OOP spending. We fit trend lines using linear autoregressive models. RESULTS: Between 2004 and 2011, the percentage of women with metastatic breast cancer enrolled in employer-mandated HDHPs increased from 8 to 23% while the percentage enrolled in employer-mandated low-deductible plans (LDHPs) decreased from 69 to 37%. Over the same time period, estimated annual inflation-adjusted total health service spending among women with metastatic breast cancer whose employers only offered HDHPs or LDHPS increased from $96,899 to $104,688 (increase of $1197 per year; 95% confidence interval [CI]: $47,$2,348). Corresponding OOP spending values among these women with employer-mandated deductible levels were $4,496 and $5,151 ($91 per year trend; 95% CI -$13,$195). From 2004-2011, women in HDHPs and LDHPs had unchanged annual OOP spending, estimated at of $6642 (95% CI $6,268,$7016) and $4,247 (95% CI $3956,$4538), respectively. Thus, women in HDHPs experienced 55% (44%, 66%) more OOP spending than women in LDHP. CONCLUSIONS: OOP spending among women with metastatic breast cancer and employer-mandated deductible levels was 55% higher among HDHP than LDHP members, and employer-mandated HDHP enrollment increased substantially from 2004 to 2011. Stakeholders and policymakers should design health plans that protect financially vulnerable cancer patients from high OOP costs.

Impact of high-deductible insurance on adjuvant hormonal therapy use in breast cancer.

OBJECTIVE: High-deductible health plans (HDHPs) have become the predominant commercial health insurance arrangement in the US. HDHPs require substantial out-of-pocket (OOP) costs for most services but often exempt medications from high cost sharing. We examined effects of HDHPs on OOP costs and utilization of adjuvant hormonal therapy (AHT), which are fundamental care for patients with breast cancer. METHODS: This controlled quasi-experimental study used claims data (2003-2012) from a large national health insurer. We included 986 women with incident early-stage breast cancer, age 25-64 years, insured by employers that mandated a transition from low-deductible (≤ $500/year) to high-deductible (≥ $1000/year) coverage, and 3479 propensity score-matched controls whose employers offered only low-deductible plans. We examined AHT utilization and OOP costs per person-year before and after the HDHP switch. RESULTS: At baseline, the OOP costs for AHT were $40.41 and $36.55 per person-year among the HDHP and control groups. After the HDHP switch, the OOP costs for AHT were $91.76 and $72.98 per person-year among the HDHP and control groups, respectively. AHT OOP costs increased among HDHP members relative to controls but the change was not significant (relative change 13.72% [95% CI - 9.25, 36.70%]). AHT use among HDHP members did not change compared to controls (relative change of 2.73% [95% CI - 14.01, 19.48%]); the change in aromatase inhibitor use was - 11.94% (95% CI - 32.76, 8.88%) and the change in tamoxifen use was 20.65% (95% CI - 8.01, 49.32%). CONCLUSION: We did not detect significant changes in AHT use after the HDHP switch. Findings might be related to modest increases in overall AHT OOP costs, the availability of low-cost generic tamoxifen, and patient awareness that AHT can prolong life and health. Minimizing OOP cost increases for essential medications might represent a feasible approach for maintaining medication adherence among HDHP members with incident breast cancer.

Do cancer survivors change their prescription drug use for financial reasons? Findings from a nationally representative sample in the United States.

BACKGROUND: There is limited evidence from nationally representative samples about changes in prescription drug use for financial reasons among cancer survivors in the United States. METHODS: The 2011 to 2014 National Health Interview Survey was used to identify adults who reported ever having been told they had cancer (cancer survivors; n = 8931) and individuals without a cancer history (n = 126,287). Measures of changes in prescription drug use for financial reasons included: 1) skipping medication doses, 2) taking less medicine, 3) delaying filling a prescription, 4) asking a doctor for lower cost medication, 5) buying prescription drugs from another country, and 6) using alternative therapies. Multivariable logistic regression analyses were controlled for demographic characteristics, number of comorbid conditions, interactions between cancer history and number of comorbid conditions, and health insurance coverage. Main analyses were stratified by age (nonelderly, ages 18-64 years; elderly, ages ≥65 years) and time since diagnosis (recently diagnosed, <2 years; previously diagnosed, ≥2 years). RESULTS: Among nonelderly individuals, both recently diagnosed (31.6%) and previously diagnosed (27.9%) cancer survivors were more likely to report any change in prescription drug use for financial reasons than those without a cancer history (21.4%), with the excess percentage changes for individual measures ranging from 3.5% to 9.9% among previously diagnosed survivors and from 2.6% to 2.7% among recently diagnosed survivors (P < .01). Elderly cancer survivors and those without a cancer history had comparable rates of changes in prescription drug use for financial reasons. CONCLUSIONS: Nonelderly cancer survivors are particularly vulnerable to changes in prescription drug use for financial reasons, suggesting that targeted efforts are needed. Cancer 2017;123:1453-1463. © 2016 American Cancer Society.

Health Insurance, Health Savings Accounts and Healthcare Utilization.

Assuming symmetric information, we show that a high-deductible health plan (HDHP) combined with a tax-favored health savings account (HSA) induces more savings and less treatment compared with a full coverage plan under reasonable risk preferences. Furthermore, a higher tax subsidy increases savings in any case but decreases medical utilization if and only if treatment expenses are above the deductible. A larger deductible increases savings but does not necessarily decrease healthcare utilization. Whether an HDHP/HSA combination is preferred over a full coverage contract depends on absolute risk aversion. A higher tax advantage increases the attractiveness of an HDHP/HSA combination, whereas the effects of changes in the deductible are ambiguous. The paper shows that a potential regulator needs to carefully set the size of the deductible as only in a certain corridor of the probability of sickness, its effect on aggregate healthcare costs are unambiguously favorable.

High deductible health plans: does cost sharing stimulate increased consumer sophistication?

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether increased cost sharing in health insurance plans induces higher levels of consumer sophistication in a non-elderly population. STUDY DESIGN: This analysis is based on the collection of survey and demographic data collected from enrollees in the RAND health insurance experiment (HIE). During the RAND HIE, enrollees were randomly assigned to different levels of cost sharing (0, 25, 50 and 95%). METHODS: The study population compromises about 2000 people enrolled in the RAND HIE, between the years 1974 and 1982. Effects on health-care decision making were measured using the results of a standardized questionnaire, administered at the beginning and end of the experiment. Points of enquiry included whether or not enrollees' (i) recognized the need for second opinions (ii) questioned the effectiveness of certain therapies and (iii) researched the background/skill of their medical providers. Consumer sophistication was also measured for regular health-care consumers, as indicated by the presence of a chronic disease. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: We found no statically significant changes (P < 0.05) in the health-care decision-making strategies between individuals randomized to high cost sharing plans and low cost sharing plans. Furthermore, we did not find a stronger effect for patients with a chronic disease. CONCLUSIONS: The evidence from the RAND HIE does not support the hypothesis that a higher level of cost sharing incentivizes the development of consumer sophistication. As a result, cost sharing alone will not promote individuals to become more selective in their health-care decision-making.

The impact of telehealth cost-sharing on healthcare utilization: Evidence from high-deductible health plans.

OBJECTIVE: Evaluate whether cost-sharing decreases led high-deductible health plans (HDHP) enrollees to increase their use of healthcare. DATA SOURCES, STUDY SETTING: National sample of chronically-ill patients age 18-64 from 2018 to 2020 (n = 1,318,178). STUDY DESIGN: Difference-in-differences analyses using entropy-balancing weights were used to evaluate the effect of a policy shift to $0 cost-sharing for telehealth on utilization for HDHP compared with non-HDHP enrollees. Due to this shock, HDHP enrollees experienced substantial declines in cost-sharing for telehealth, while non-HDHP enrollees experienced small declines. Event study models were also used to evaluate changes over time. DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS: Outcomes included use of any outpatient care; use of $0 telehealth; use of $0 telehealth as a proportion of all outpatient care; and use of any telehealth. To test whether any differences were due to preferences for care modality versus cost-sharing, we further evaluated use of non-$0 telehealth as a placebo test. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: There was no difference in change in overall outpatient visits (p = 0.84), with chronicall-ill HDHP enrollees using less care both before and after the policy shift. However, compared with non-HDHP enrollees, HDHP enrollees increased their use of $0 telehealth by 0.08 visits over a 9-month period, a 27% increase (95% CI 0.07-0.09, p < 0.001) and shifted 1.2 percentage points more of their care to $0 telehealth, a 15% increase (ß = 0.01, 95% CI 0.01, 0.01, p < 0.001). However, HDHP enrollees had lower uptake of non-$0 telehealth than non-HDHP enrollees (ß = -0.01, 95%CI -0.02, 0.00, p = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: Recent-but-expiring federal legislation exempts telehealth from HDHP deductibles for care provided in 2023 and 2024. Our results indicate that extending the protections provided by this legislation could help reduce the gap in access to care for chronically-ill persons enrolled in HDHPs.

Deductible imputation in administrative medical claims datasets.

OBJECTIVE: To validate imputation methods used to infer plan-level deductibles and determine which enrollees are in high-deductible health plans (HDHPs) in administrative claims datasets. DATA SOURCES AND STUDY SETTING: 2017 medical and pharmaceutical claims from OptumLabs Data Warehouse for US individuals <65 continuously enrolled in an employer-sponsored plan. Data include enrollee and plan characteristics, deductible spending, plan spending, and actual plan-level deductibles. STUDY DESIGN: We impute plan deductibles using four methods: (1) parametric prediction using individual-level spending; (2) parametric prediction with imputation and plan characteristics; (3) highest plan-specific mode of individual annual deductible spending; and (4) deductible spending at the 80th percentile among individuals meeting their deductible. We compare deductibles' levels and categories for imputed versus actual deductibles. DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS: Not applicable. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: All methods had a positive predictive value (PPV) for determining high- versus low-deductible plans of ≥87%; negative predictive values (NPV) were lower. The method imputing plan-specific deductible spending modes was most accurate and least computationally intensive (PPV: 95%; NPV: 91%). This method also best correlated with actual deductible levels; 69% of imputed deductibles were within $250 of the true deductible. CONCLUSIONS: In the absence of plan structure data, imputing plan-specific modes of individual annual deductible spending best correlates with true deductibles and best predicts enrollees in HDHPs.

A structural microsimulation model for demand-side cost-sharing in healthcare.

Demand-side cost-sharing reduces moral hazard in healthcare but increases exposure to out-of-pocket expenditure. We introduce a structural microsimulation model to evaluate both total and out-of-pocket expenditure for different cost-sharing schemes. We use a Bayesian mixture model to capture the healthcare expenditure distributions across different age-gender categories. We estimate the model using Dutch data and simulate outcomes for a number of policies. The model suggests that for a deductible of 300 euros shifting the starting point of the deductible away from zero to 400 euros leads to an average 4% reduction in healthcare expenditure and 47% lower out-of-pocket payments.

The Association Between Type of Insurance Plan, Out-of-Pocket Cost, and Adherence to Antihypertensive Medications in Medicare Supplement Insurance Enrollees.

BACKGROUND: Medicare supplement insurance, or Medigap, covers 21% of Medicare beneficiaries. Despite offsetting some out-of-pocket (OOP) expenses, remaining OOP costs may pose a barrier to medication adherence. This study aims to evaluate how OOP costs and insurance plan types influence medication adherence among beneficiaries covered by Medicare supplement plans. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis of the Merative MarketScan Medicare Supplement Database (2017-2019) in Medigap enrollees (≥65 years) with hypertension. The proportion of days covered (PDC) was a continuous measure of medication adherence and was also dichotomized (PDC ≥0.8) to quantify adequate adherence. Beta-binomial and logistic regression models were used to estimate associations between these outcomes and insurance plan type and log-transformed OOP costs, adjusting for patient characteristics. RESULTS: Among 27,407 patients with hypertension, the average PDC was 0.68 ±â€…0.31; 47.5% achieved adequate adherence. A mean $1 higher in 30-day OOP costs were associated with a 0.06 (95% confidence intervals [CIs]: -0.09 to -0.03) lower probability of adequate adherence, or a 5% (95% CI: 4%-7%) decrease in PDC. Compared with comprehensive plan enrollees, the odds of adequate adherence were lower among those with point-of-service plans (odds ratio [OR]: 0.69, 95% CI: 0.62-0.77), but higher among those with preferred provider organization (PPO) plans (OR: 1.08, 95% CI: 1.01-1.15). Moreover, the association between OOP costs and PDC was significantly greater for PPO enrollees. CONCLUSIONS: While Medicare supplement insurance alleviates some OOP costs, different insurance plans and remaining OOP costs influence medication adherence. Reducing patient cost-sharing may improve medication adherence.