Trends in high deductible health plan enrolment and spending among commercially insured members with and without chronic conditions: a Natural Experiment for Translation in Diabetes (NEXT-D2) Study

ObjectivesTo examine trends in high deductible health plan (HDHP) enrolment among members with diabetes and cardiovascular disease (CVD) compared with healthy members and compare out-of-pocket (OOP) and total spending for members with chronic conditions in HDHPs versus low deductible plans.DesignDescriptive study with time trends.SettingA large national commercial insurance database.Participants1.2 million members with diabetes, 4.5 million members with CVD (without diabetes) and 18 million healthy members (defined by a low comorbidity score) under the age of 65 years and insured between 2005 and 2013.Outcome measuresPercentage of members in an HDHP (ie, annual deductible ≥$1000) by year, annual mean OOP and total spending, adjusted for member sociodemographic and employer characteristics.ResultsEnrolment in HDHPs among members in all disease categories increased by 5 percentage points a year and was over 50% by 2013. On average, over the study period, HDHP enrolment among members with diabetes and CVD was 2.84 (95% CI: 2.78 to 2.90) and 2.02 (95% CI: 1.98 to 2.05) percentage points lower, respectively, than among healthy members. HDHP members with diabetes, CVD and low morbidity had higher annual OOP costs ($636 (95% CI: 630 to 642), $539 (95% CI: 537 to 542) and $113 (95% CI: 112 to 113)) and lower total costs (−$529 (95% CI: −597 to −461), −$364 (95% CI: −385 to −342) and −$79 (95% CI: −81 to −76)), respectively, than corresponding low deductible members when averaged over the study period. Members with chronic diseases had yearly OOP expenditures that were five to seven times higher than healthier members.ConclusionHigh HDHP enrolment coupled with the high OOP costs associated with HDHPs may be particularly detrimental to the financial well-being of people with diabetes and CVD, who have more healthcare needs than healthier populations.

Nonelderly Adult Cancer Survivors in High Deductible Health Plan: Healthcare Expenditure, Utilization and Access

Background: To compare healthcare expenditure, utilization and access between nonelderly adult cancer survivors enrolled in a high deductible health plan with a health savings account (“HDHP+HSA”), HDHP without HSA (“HDHP alone”) and low deductible health plan (“LDHP”). Methods: 1735 cancer survivors, aged 18–64 years, with continuous private coverage identified from the 2012–2017 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey: HDHP alone (n = 353), HDHP+HSA (n = 242) and LDHP (n = 1140). Healthcare expenditures, utilization and inability/delay obtaining medical care were analyzed using generalized linear regressions with inverse propensity score weighting and doubly robust estimation. Results: HDHP alone group (23,255 USD) had significantly higher total healthcare expenditure compared to HDHP+HSA (15,580 USD, p = 0.012) and LDHP (16,261 USD, p = 0.016). HDHP alone (6089 USD; p = 0.002) and HDHP+HSA (5743 USD; p = 0.012) groups had significantly higher out-of-pocket (OOP) expenditure compared to LDHP (4853 USD). HDHP alone (17,128 USD, p = 0.010) and LDHP (12,645 USD, p = 0.045) had significantly higher private insurer payments compared to HDHP+HSA (9216 USD). No differences were found in utilization or inability/delay obtaining medical care across groups. Conclusions: Non-elderly adult cancer survivors with continuous coverage and comparable sociodemographic characteristics enrolled in HDHP with HSA displayed the lowest healthcare costs compared to HDHP without HSA and LDHP. HDHP+HSA had a significantly higher OOP expenditure than LDHP. No significant differences were observed in utilization or access among groups.

Increasing Out-of-Pocket Costs for Neurologic Care for Privately-Insured Patients

Objective:To measure the out-of-pocket costs of evaluation and management (E/M) services and common diagnostic testing for neurology patients.Methods:Utilizing a large, privately-insured healthcare claims database, we identified patients with a neurologic visit or diagnostic test from 2001-2016 and assessed inflation-adjusted out-of-pocket costs for E/M visits, neuroimaging, and neurophysiologic testing. For each diagnostic service each year, we estimated the proportion of patients with out-of-pocket costs, the mean out-of-pocket cost, and the proportion of the total service cost paid out-of-pocket. We modeled out-of-pocket cost as a function of patient and insurance factors.Results:We identified 3,724,342 patients. The most frequent neurologic services were E/M visits (78.5%), electromyogram/nerve conduction studies (EMG/NCS) (7.7%), MRIs (5.3%), and electroencephalograms (EEGs) (4.5%). Annually, 86.5-95.2% of patients paid out-of-pocket costs for E/M visits and 23.1-69.5% for diagnostic tests. For patients paying any out-of-pocket cost, the mean out-of-pocket cost increased over time, most substantially for EEG, MRI, and E/M. Out-of-pocket costs varied considerably; for an MRI in 2016, the 50th percentile paid $103.1 and the 95th percentile paid $875.4. The proportion of total service cost paid out-of-pocket increased. High deductible health plan (HDHP) enrollment was associated with higher out-of-pocket costs for MRI, EMG/NCS, and EEG.Conclusions:An increasing number of patients pay out-of-pocket for neurologic diagnostic services. These costs are rising and vary greatly across patients and tests. The cost sharing burden is particularly high for the growing population with HDHPs. In this setting, neurologic evaluation might result in financial hardship for patients.

Economics Risks of and Growth of the High Deductible Health Plan Among Patients With Cognitive Impairment

OBJECTIVES: High Deductible Health Plan (HDHP) is characterized by higher deductibles and lower monthly premiums. Nevertheless, health economists are concerned that HDHPs may reduce or delay needed care, which will ultimately lead to poorer access to care for chronically affected participants. The objectives of this research are 1) to investigate the HDHP enrollment trend over the past decade; and, 2) to determine the effects of HDHP on risks of financial access risks among adults with cognitive impairment (CI). METHODS: Data were obtained between 2010-2018 from National Health Interview Survey (NHIS). Financial access to healthcare was assessed based on 6 survey questions by CDC. For data analysis, simple T tests and Chisq tests were used where appropriate, with multi-variable logistic regressions implemented to evaluate the effects of HDHP on risks of financial access. RESULTS: Of the 103,649 enrollments, 1,148 were with cognitive impairment and 102,501 were without CI diagnosis. A 55% increase in HDHP registers with cognitive impairment was observed from 2010 (30.50%) to 2018 (47.24%). After controlling for confounding variables, patients with HDPHs were more likely to have risks of financial access compared to those without HDHP (OR= 1.313, 95% CI, 1.002-1.719, p=0.0483). CONCLUSIONS: HDHPs are intended to support effective care options and reduce health care costs. Our research among CI patients with HDHP experienced more financial access risks than those without HDHP, indicating that HDHPs might have unintended consequences of healthcare usage. Employers and health care decision-makers may need to consider providing compensation to those HDHP enrollers with CI.