Evidence that value-based insurance can be effective

Health Affairs

Volumn 29, Issue 3, 2010, Pages 530-536

  Chernew, Michael E ^a   Juster, Iver A ^b   Shah, Mayur ^b   Wegh, Arnold ^b   Rosenberg, Stephen ^b   Rosen, Allison B ^c   Sokol, Michael C ^d   Yu Isenberg, Kristina ^e   Fendrick, A Mark ^c  

^a HARVARD MEDICAL SCHOOL   (United States)

^b ActiveHealth Management   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN MEDICAL SCHOOL   (United States)

^d MERCK RESEARCH LABORATORIES   (United States)

^e Regional Outcomes Research   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; HEALTH CARE COST; HEALTH INSURANCE; HEALTH PROGRAM; HEALTH SERVICE;

CHRONIC DISEASE; COST SHARING; COSTS AND COST ANALYSIS; DEDUCTIBLES AND COINSURANCE; EVIDENCE-BASED PRACTICE; HEALTH BENEFIT PLANS, EMPLOYEE; HEALTH CARE COSTS; HEALTH EXPENDITURES; HEALTH PLAN IMPLEMENTATION; HUMANS; PATIENT ACCEPTANCE OF HEALTH CARE; PRESCRIPTION DRUGS; PROGRAM EVALUATION; REIMBURSEMENT MECHANISMS; UNITED STATES;

EID: 77950787163     PISSN: 02782715     EISSN: 15445208     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1377/hlthaff.2009.0119     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. Fendrick AM, Smith DG, Chernew ME, Shah SN. A benefit-based copay for prescription drugs: patient contribution based on total benefits, not drug acquisition cost. Am J Manag Care. 2001;7(9):861-7.
2. Hensley S. From "one size fits all" to tailored copayments. Wall Street Journal. 2004 Jun. 16.
3. Chernew ME, Rosen AB, Fendrick AM. Value-based insurance design. Health Aff (Millwood). 2007;26(2):w195-203.
4. Thorpe KE, Howard DH. The rise in spending among Medicare beneficiaries: the role of chronic disease prevalence and changes in treatment intensity. Health Aff 2006;25(5):w378-88.
5. Thorpe KE. Cost sharing, caps on benefits, and the chronically ill-a policy mismatch. N Engl J Med. 2006;354(22):2385-6.
6. Mahoney JJ. Reducing patient drug acquisition costs can lower diabetes health claims. Am J Manag Care. 2005;11:S170-6.
7. Freudenheim M. To save later, some employees are offering free drugs now. New York Times. 2007 Feb. 21.
8. Hewitt Associates. Lincolnshire (IL): Hewitt Associates; 2007 Aug. 14. Press release, Hewitt launches new tool to help companies quantify cost impact of value-based health care designs.
9. Mercer [Internet]. New York (NY): Mercer; c2009. Press release, Mercer creates advanced pharmacy benefit design based on latest medical evidence; 2008 Jan 23 [cited 2010 Jan 8]. Available from: http://www.mercer.com/summary.htm? siteLanguage=100&idContent=1293605
10. Aetna. Hartford (CT): Aetna; 2007 Dec. 5. Press release, New Aetna Rxsavings program cuts cost for medications used to treat chronic health conditions.
11. Demand grows for value-based Rx plans; as insurers expand offerings, ROI is elusive. Drug Benefit News [serial on the Internet]. 2008 Jul. 15 [cited 2010 Jan 8]. Available from: http://www.sph.umich.edu/vbidcenter/pdfs/dbn062708.pdf
12. Seniors' Medication Copayment Reduction Act of 2009, S 1040. 111th Cong., 1st sess. (2009).
13. Goldman DP, Joyce GF, Escarce JJ, Pace JE, Soloman MD, Laouri M, et al. Pharmacy benefits and the use of drugs by the chronically ill. JAMA. 2004;291(19):2344-50.
14. Gibson TB, Ozminkowski RJ, Goetzel RZ. The effects of prescription drug cost sharing: a review of the evidence. Am J Manag Care. 2005;11(11):730-4.
15. Gibson TB, Mark TL, McGuigan KA, Axelsen K, Wang S. The effects of prescription drug copayments on statin adherence. Am J Manag Care. 2006;12(9):509-17.
16. Roblin DW, Platt R, Goodman MJ, Hsu J, Nelson WW, Smith DH, et al. Effect of increased cost-sharing on oral hypoglycemic use in five managed care organizations: how much is too much? Med Care. 2005;43(10):951-9.
17. Japsen B. Diabetes care: employers save money after lowering costs for employees' preventative care. Chicago Tribune. 2009 May 7.
18. Fuhrmans V. New tack on copays: cutting them. Wall Street Journal. 2007 May 8.
19. Wojcik J. Free presciption drugs boost usage, cut costs: program targeting chronic conditions improves health. Business Insurance [serial on the Internet]. 2007 [cited 2010 Jan 8]. Available from: http://www. businessinsurance.com/cgi-bin/article.pl?articleId=21450
20. Sedjo RL, Cox ER. Lowering copayments: impact of simvastatin patent expiration on patient adherence. Am J Manag Care. 2008;14(12):813-8.
21. Chernew ME, Shah MR, Wegh A, Rosenberg SN, Juster IA, Rosen AB, et al. Impact of decreasing copayments on medication adherence within a disease management environment. Health Aff (Millwood). 2008;27(1):103-12.
22. Goldman DP, Joyce GF, Zheng Y Prescription drug cost sharing: associations with medication and medical utilization and spending and health. JAMA. 2007;289(1):61-9.
23. Cranor CW, Bunting BA, Christensen DB. The Asheville project: long-term clinical and economic outcomes of a community pharmacy diabetes care program. J Am Pharm Assoc. 2003;43(2):173-84.
24. Fireman B, Bartlett J, Selby J. Can disease management reduce health care costs by improving quality? Health Aff (Millwood). 2004;23(6):63-75.
25. Cohen JT, Neumann PJ, Weinstein MC. Does preventive care save money? Health economics and the presidential candidates. N Engl J Med. 2008;358:661-3.
26. Economic analysis would focus on the marginal cost of the service, but in practice many analysts focus on the price of the service which often exceeds marginal cost. Moreover, a true societal perspective would include costs and benefits outside of the health care system, such as increased worker productivity.
27. The disease management program was a comprehensive, telephonic, nurse-staffed program. This is a fairly typical telephonic disease management program, except for its broad scope-covering thirty-two clinical conditions-and its linkage to a system of "clinical alerts, " in which medical, drug, and lab claims; lab results; and a large electronic database of clinical recommendations from the medical literature are used to identify opportunities to improve clinical care. When the clinical data provided indication for the use of a specific test or medication (or a contraindication against a specific medication), the physician and patient were notified. This "clinical alerting" program was run against the employer's entire insured population several times a month. Physicians were notified of potential clinical improvement opportunities via telephone, fax, or mail, as appropriate to the urgency of the clinical alert; and members were notified by telephone and mail if enrolled in the disease management program or by mail alone if not enrolled. To permit physicians to respond first to any clinical alerts, member notification was lagged by two to three weeks.
28. The ratio of adherer to non-adherer costs (adherence effectiveness) that would allow the firm to break even can be computed by simultaneously solving the equations for the following: (1) pre-VBID cost, (2) post-VBID cost, (3) the percentage who adhere post-VBID, (4) an effectiveness impact equation that produces dollars spent on adherers, and (5) increased drug cost. Complete equations are available in an Online Appendix; to access this appendix, click the Online Appendix link in the box to the right of the article online.
29. Sokol MC, McGuigan KA, Verbrugge RR, Epstein RS. Impact of medication adherence on hospitalization risk and healthcare cost. Med Care. 2005;43(6):521-30.
30. Heart Protection Study Collaborative Group. MRC/BHF Heart Protection Study of cholesterol lowering with simvastatin in 20, 536 high-risk individuals: a randomised, placebo controlled trial. Lancet. 2002;360:7-22.
31. The SOLVD Investigators. Effect of enalapril on survival in patients with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction and congestive heart failure. N Engl J Med. 1991;325:293-302.
32. The SOLVD Investigators. Effect of enalapril on mortality and the development of heart failure in asymptomatic patients with reduced left ventricular ejection fractions. N Engl J Med. 1992;327:685-91.
33. Heart Outcomes Prevention Evaluation Study Investigators. Effects of an angiotensin converting-enzyme inhibitor, ramipril, on cardiovascular events in high-risk patients. N Engl J Med. 2000;342:145-53.
34. The EURopean trial on reduction of cardiac events with perindopril in stable coronary artery disease investigators. Efficacy of perindopril in reduction of cardiovascular events among patients with stable coronary artery disease: randomized, doubleblind, placebo-controlled, multicentre trial (the EUROPA study). Lancet. 2003;362:782-8.
35. Beta-blocker Heart Attack Study Group. A randomized trial of propranolol in patients with acute myocardial infarction. II. Morbidity results. JAMA. 1983;250:2814-9.
36. Brophy JM, Joseph L, Rouleau JL. Beta-blockers in congestive heart failure: a Bayesian meta-analysis. Ann Intern Med. 2001;134:550-60.
37. Sacks FM, Pfeffer MA, Moye LA, Rouleau JL, Rutherford JD, Cole TG, et al. The effect of pravastatin on coronary events after myocardial infarction in patients with average cholesterol levels. N Engl J Med. 1996;335:1001-09.
38. Long Term Intervention with Pravastatin in Ischemic Disease (LIPID) Study Group. Prevention of cardiovascular events and death with pravastatin in patients with coronary heart disease and a broad range of initial cholesterol levels. N Engl J Med. 1998;339:1349-57.
39. Chandra A, Gruber J, McKnight R. Medical price sensitivity and optimal health insurance for the elderly. Mimeo. Boston (MA): Massachusetts Institute of Technology; 2009.